HERE’S a question: who do People’s Deputies serve – their constituency or the whole island? The right answer should be obvious.

While it’s quite proper that deputies take a particular interest in issues affecting their electoral district, their first responsibility must always be to Guernsey. That means that on those rare occasions when parochial and island interests may clash, they really must take the wider view.

That’s easy to say, but at times some deputies seem to find it hard to put into practice. Whether that’s because of a laudable passion for their home patch or a craven fear of losing precious votes, I leave you to judge.

Whatever the reason, there is a whiff of hypocrisy about those politicians who call (rightly) for a more strategic approach to policymaking but then suspend their own strategic judgement because an issue generates strong feelings in their own backyard.

We’ll probably see a considerable amount of such ‘regionalism’ over the airport runway. If western deputies articulate the concerns of their constituents and demand answers to their questions then full marks to them, it’s part of their job. But if they allow those concerns to overrule the broader interests of Guernsey, then that’s bad government. They are elected by their constituency to govern the whole island.

A far worse example was the weakness of some of our leaders over rationalising primary schools. Both the former and current T&R ministers knew that maintaining more school places than needed was a shocking waste of money. This obvious fact has now been confirmed by Tribal Helm. And yet Deputy Lyndon Trott voted to keep St Sampson’s Infants open and Deputy Charles Parkinson, whose constituency includes St Andrew’s, voted to retain that school.

What is galling is that these same two deputies are apparently among the opportunists using the recent WAO report to call for more centralisation of power. The argument goes that this would lead to better government because it would allow a more strategic approach to decision-making.

However, if those leading the policymaking process are so quick to set aside objective judgement in order to score parochial brownie points, then giving them increased power could be dangerous. What is really needed is far less a change in structure (although some reform is justified) and far more the adoption of statesmanlike behaviour by our individual deputies.

Talking of the WAO report, it’s a pretty disappointing document for £65,000. Yes, it confirms the fault lines we already knew existed in our government.

1. Deputies interfering in operational matters instead of sticking to policy.
2. Members ‘going native’ and putting departmental considerations before the aims of the whole States.
3. Protracted and confused decision-making.
4. Lack of good-quality information leading to ‘decision-making by gut feeling’.
5. Lack of strategic direction.

What it doesn’t do is make any suggestion about how to correct those faults. Whether that shortcoming is the fault of PAC in drafting the terms of reference or the WAO for shying away from the task, I don’t know. However, it renders the report pretty useless other than as a talking point, which could, just possibly, lead to improvements in the future if the political will is there.

Worse than that, the lack of proposals means everyone and his dog is reading into it support for their own pet theory of how government should be delivered.

The classic example is the increasingly strident but small minority of islanders who crave cabinet government.

‘This supports our case,’ they bellow, despite the Auditor General stating in unequivocal terms that the changes he advocates don’t require a cabinet structure. Indeed, he suggests strongly that the problems are only partly structural and are also down to the refusal of individual members to act responsibly and coalesce around clear strategic aims.

How should things be taken forward? Well, set up a working group to look at structural issues by all means, but don’t wait for its conclusions before acting.

• Policy Council: stop dealing with minutiae and start drawing up real strategic policy for the States to approve, amend or reject and involve relevant departments in that process.
• Scrutiny: ensure that departmental policy is supporting rather than undermining the States agreed strategic aims.
• Individual members: look at the big picture and not just your department or parish, and have the courage to commit to agreed strategic aims.

You won’t please all of the people all of the time, but you will at least produce some solid achievements.