IN THE hotly-debated run up to the ultimately fudged Harwood Report on government reform in 2004, the States of the day found itself under attack from the trades union movement, business representatives, islanders generally and this newspaper.

From the outset, it was clear that the changes would not be sufficient to deal with the problems – and, in fairness, a rapidly changing global economic and political climate – a conclusion reinforced by successive independent reports and events themselves.

That process of verification culminated with publication of the Wales Audit Office report, showing that the States of Guernsey ticked not one box when it comes to the six principles of governance.

Yet instead of recognising the challenge and responsibility they have for turning around that 0/10 verdict, the Policy Council has gone into a state of denial and thrown the WAO’s seminal work into the (now very large) ‘too difficult’ drawer.

Whether States members as a whole are also collectively in denial remains to be seen. A growing number do not want to be seen in the same head-in-the-sand light as the council and an attempt to force a debate on the WAO findings remains a strong possibility.

That will have been reinforced by the IoD debate on Thursday, in which business leaders regarded dealing with the governance issue as the States’ number one priority.

If ministers cannot see the writing on the wall, islanders will have to force their hand.

A reminder, minister…

IN THE States this week, Commerce and Employment minister Carla McNaulty Bauer chose to attack this newspaper over its reporting of what might be regarded as her foot-in-the-mouth performance on old age pensions.

She told the Assembly she had been quoted as saying that pension rates should be cut and went on: ‘I never said that, or meant that, or would wish that to happen.’

To assist her recollection, what she actually said at the time, in writing, was: ‘A decision was made that pensions would be set at a generous rate [RPI plus one], but in my view the level has to be something the island can afford. I would prefer the pension to be set at a lower rate perhaps kept at annual RPI increases only…’

Pensioners might find an apology, rather than a denial, more believable.