£70m. – cost of States waste revealed
Thursday 24th September 2009, 2:30PM BST.
THE States’ silo mentality is costing the island £51m.
Tribal Consulting’s Fundamental Spending Review, released this morning, reveals for the first time how much the inability of government departments to cooperate is costing the taxpayer.
Tribal’s Ian McPherson (pictured) was highly critical of the States culture and insisted £70m. could be saved over the next five years if members supported his recommendations.
Of that, 73% – or £51m. – would come from eliminating the culture of departments working in inefficient isolation.
But even with that saving, Treasury minister Charles Parkinson, pictured right, has warned that taxpayers face paying up to £40m. extra a year to help fill the budget deficit.
Mr McPherson said: ‘We discovered a number of operational issues on our mission, such as a lack of corporate governance and any sense of identity,’ he said.
‘People relate to the department for which they operate but not to the States – we have to break down the silos. There is no need for them to be there.’
The report comes weeks after the Wales Audit Office gave a similarly damning verdict on Guernsey’s government.
Mr McPherson said Tribal Consulting had found very little evidence-based decision making.
For anyone outside the departments it was hard to see how decisions had been made because of the lack of transparency, he said.
- To read Guernsey Press stories in full click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.
Campaigns
Voice For Victims
Voice for Victims is a campaign aimed at promoting the rights of those affected by child sexual abuse.
This is Guernsey
Guernsey Press
Hi.
I have only scanned over this article but would like to ask how much this has cost. Simply because I believe its a further waste of money because its no doubt fallen upon deaf ears!!! (again)
GD.
Report abuse
450,000
Report abuse
Is that it? Doesn’t strike me as very much, 70m over 5 years is about £200 per person each year. Don’t get me wrong, if I could pay £200 less tax this year I’d take it, as I’m sure most people would. So the savings should be made, but there’s a question of priorities here. Total States expenditure is about 300m per year, so this seems to say less than 5% that is wasted. Come on Digsy is this really hold-the-front-page stuff? Why not a headline like “States Expenditure Judged 96% Efficient” instead?
What would really make a difference would be to improve the political decision making. Take two examples- delaying Zero-Ten by a year to coincide with Jersey’s start date would have saved 100m in one year. The EfW plant will cost 250m over its lifetime, and if you take Rodney Brouard’s word for it, we don’t really need it and it seems most people don’t want it. That’s 350m on just two decisions- FIVE TIMES the amount on the front page, or a cost of nearly £6,000 per person in total.
I do think the States ought to make these where possible, but there are more important things to lose sleep over.
Report abuse
As for Tribal helm it has been described as a damning report, well even the authors don’t believe that, they recognised that we have to supply the services of a small country not a local council and they describe those services as “Excellent” After all how many councils have to supply two harbours, an airport together with an entire police and fraud service two fire departments and all its schools and hospitals. Many of these functions would be supplied by neighbouring councils in different counties. We do not have that luxury. I welcome the report and found some of the recommendations refreshing but a word of caution, if you want a government where the majority of its services are outsourced with direct billing to the public and the public are charged for everything that is left via the government then we can do that tomorrow and we would indeed become ultra efficient but I am not sure3 it is an island that many would want to live in. So yes I do welcome the report but it is far from damning as the media keep insisting it is a culture that has built up over 60 odd years and oddly enough we have been recognised by most as having some of the best public services in the world all done with some of the lowest taxes and charges anywhere.
Report abuse
But Dave Jones, we’re still one of the least attractive tax havens for those mobile rich.
Yet all of our efforts are made to attract these types. To the point of running deficits.
You only have to look at that Panorama programme that’s got the suits jumping to see potential flaws in this entire approach. Our services would not survive without even the reduced tax take from the big finance folks, or would they? If we’re prepared to run a debt just to please the few bankers, could we not run a debt to provide services for the majority locals? Oh and while we’re at it can we not borrow money externally to invest in an industry that will survive the Greed Kings?
If I ask too many questions can I be labelled a Communist please despite what I write?
Report abuse
You’re right Dave, it’s not a ‘damning’ report and the Tribal Helm guy I saw interviewed on radio and TV was anything but damning.
What this report does do, though, is highlight a whole raft of savings that can be made – if you and your fellow States members have the mettle to carry them through.
I think what you and the Policy Council and the States as a whole must do now is to accept the entire findings of the Tribal Helm report and go for the entire raft of suggested savings, without further question and without amendment, to show that you mean business when it comes to making these efficiencies.
This will mean slaying a few of those costly sacred cows like St Andrew’s and St Sampson’s schools and college funding. I admit if I was in your position I would find it very hard to vote against my own sacred cow, the bus subsidy. Also, I accept it is very easy for someone like me to say all of this from the sidelines, but here is a golden opportunity not to take the populist position and to act decisively with one broad sweep of the butcher’s knife.
The alternative would be to allow every Tom, Dick and Harry in the States to make a case in favour of saving his or her pet scheme on the Tribal Helm hit list with the result that no significant savings will be made as they are rescued one by one.
There is going to be no gain without pain. Let the cuts begin.
Report abuse
Like Aidan Matthews I feel that £70 million over 5 years is too low a figure. I would put the figure at more like £100 over 5 years.
The comment of Mr Matthews regarding zero 10 and the incinerator alternative seem to suggest a States hell bent on spending.
Report abuse
Just have a read of the actual report and you will see that Tribal have a very good working knowledge of wasting resources.
Of the 42 pages, 4 are totally unnesessary full page photographs. And littered throughout are another 4 pages worth of smaller photos, some of which actually obscure the text !!!
Add in the numerous pages where the text for no apparent reason takes up only two thirds of the width of the page ….
And then the final page which is blank save for the Tribal logo and contact details. Which would easily fit on the bottom of the preceeding page which is half empty anyway !!!!!
I reckon it would all fit easily into just 30 or so pages …. and be easier to read as a result … an instant saving of 25% with NO cost to impliment and and NO reduction in service delivered …..
Report abuse
You see again yestoday the press editorial describes the Tribal Helm review as DEVISTATING a word not used or supported by the author of the report nor a word I have heard from anyone else who has read the report
Many of the savings had already been identified and implemented so Tribal Helm cannot claim credit for several of them as they were in place or active work streams long before T.H. came on the scene., one example is Housing charging for services, that policy was agreed over a year ago and discussions started back when Zero 10 came in, Charging for administration is now in place. Another one of there recommendations was the scrapping of the Homes Loan scheme again already agreed by the housing board and implemented, moving the rent rebate scheme to social security, again discussions on this were started a year ago and this will form part of the overall review of the benefit system, Social Security envisage the new benefit scheme will be in place by 2012.
The net savings identified exclusively from Housing amount to £85,000 – £154,000 over 5 years. We are not big players in this! This is not surprising as we have been running a very tight ship for many years and saving the States money for several years! Through the use of housing associations, we have “saved” the States millions of pounds of capital expenditure which as a direct result has enabled other States’ capital projects to be funded. I am pleased with the report as it has recognised the corporate way housing has behaved certainly for the last ten years.
Report abuse
We have also returned 10 million pounds back to T&R which is also a first.
Report abuse