ONE of the consequences of Policy Council proposals to open an office in Brussels being described as a ‘vanity project’ is that it highlights the misunderstanding – possibly even mistrust – of the role of the financial services sector in the island.

It was a theme also touched on at the Institute of Directors annual debate last week when former Financial Services Commission head John Roper talked of the old days when the States contained individuals who were intimately involved with the island’s indigenous industries.

It gave rise at the time to complaints that Guernsey was run by the growers, and while there was some truth in the concerns, there were also many benefits. What was good for growers and their staff was generally good for the island. As a result, the need to invest for the future, to react to competition and to identify and try to head off any threats was well understood.

The island flourished and the foundations and infrastructure of today’s community were laid.

Now, however, that direct link between wealth creators and elected representatives has virtually disappeared. For any community to have a future, it needs jobs. To have a prosperous future, it needs well-paid employment and a tax regime that encourages people to stay and fund levels of public services close to those enjoyed now.

If not from finance, where will those jobs come from?

This newspaper has expressed some reservations that insufficient detail has been given on what the proposed office entails but there is no doubting its essentiality.

In EU circles, ‘Channel Islands’ is synonymous with tax haven, a leech-like blot sucking money out of proper economies and something to be closed down at all costs.

Yes, it is an attitude founded on ignorance and prejudice but it is too dangerous to Guernsey’s economic well-being to remain unchecked.

Shadow Chancellor George Osborne yesterday spoke of a public sector pay freeze, but one sparing anyone on less than £18,000 a year.

The fact that average household income here is more than £50,000, over two-thirds higher than in the UK, is justification enough for spending £200,000 on a Brussels office.