Time for team-work, not boycotts
Friday 9th October 2009, 2:56PM BST.
A REMINDER sent out to States members on behalf of the Guernsey International Business Association and inviting them to a breakfast meeting designed to provide an update to deputies on some of the threats facing a significant sector of the financial services industry here has provoked a quite surprising exchange of emails between Giba and some of the members.
In particular, one minister is urging a boycott of an event that could provide deputies with valuable new information on potential difficulties facing this island.
The reason is that the Giba chairman earlier described the current system of government, based as it is on a fudged version of the Harwood Report reforms, as a mongrel system.
It was perhaps a strong expression but the context made it clear that it was aimed at the mechanics of government, certainly not the individuals concerned. Nevertheless, a number have taken offence and as a result others are being urged not to attend the briefing.
That is unfortunate. States members, and islanders too, need to be fully aware of the value of financial services, the jobs it creates, the tax revenues it generates and the very real threats it faces, especially from the EU.
External influences combined with unprecedented cost pressures mean that Guernsey as a community has to work together as never before if the island is to maintain the current standard of living enjoyed by the majority.
In the months and years ahead, sacrifices will have to be made, as Guernsey cuts its cloth and that process will be facilitated if islanders and their representatives are fully engaged in the issues.
Urging deputies to turn their back on briefings from those at the sharp end of Guernsey’s lead wealth-producing sector is not helpful and is probably damaging, especially given that States members are regularly criticised for not really listening.
By any standards, the island has some challenging times ahead and will need all its resources to get through successfully.
In that context, blanking an entire group on the strength of one word will be seen as needlessly narrow-minded.
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
The writer of Comment says
“Urging deputies to turn their back on briefings from those at the sharp end of Guernsey’s lead wealth-producing sector is not helpful and is probably damaging, especially given that States members are regularly criticised for not really listening”
I have been trying without success to think of any briefing that has been in the interest of the people of Guernsey, and not the vested interest GIBA and others represent.
Good on Dave Jones for making a stand. Shame more of his colleagues don’t have the courage to say what they really think.
Report abuse
Stephen I wasn’t trying to make a stand, I was expressing my anger at some in the business community who want government to jump through hoops for them, in order to bring changes they want to see without them having the courtesy of going through the electoral process, It is odd how personal e-mails end up on the pages of the Press, but there we are. This Mongrel States the head of GIBA describes might not have the pedigree that he wants but it was chosen by the public and at the time of the Harwood report our system of government was debated presumably by another mongrel States and it was decided in a democratic vote that we would stick with our consensus system we have. The problem with business of course is they are not democracies and those who do not jump when ordered are dismissed. Governments are not like businesses they have to provide everything for everybody, in a business things that are non productive and cost money are eliminated, in a government the opposite is true, money is needed for those in society that cannot manage them selves. The problem with business leaders they always think they know how to run things better than anyone else when it is clear from years of evidence that they don’t. This latest financial disaster was led and run by extremely well paid bankers who made a complete mess of it and showed us all that many of them couldn’t run a chip shop (no offence to any Chip shop owners) and who bailed them out in the end it was a government well around the globe it was several governments. So I think the business community should show a little more humility when it comes to pointing the finger, don’t you?
Report abuse
Once again Mr Jones and the previous commentator (Mr John) decide to contrast “the people of Guernsey” against both the IOD and GIBA based on their own ill informed prejudices that these Groups are populated by people from overseas who have their own interest at heart. I hear an underlying message which, in my view, smacks of language which is tolerated only because the targets of their comments are generally white and middle class.
I was born in Guernsey, have worked in Guernsey’s finance industry all of my working life, have been a member of the GIBA counsel and am proud to be a member of the IOD for nearly 20 years. It seems that in Mr Jones’ world I am invisible or am I just an unfortunate truth which gets in the way of a good rant? Mr Jones, I am not alone: contrary to myth often perpetuated, real Guerns do work in the finance industry in large numbers at senior and junior positions and the Island economy at every level benefits from our earning and spending.
What I would also tell you if we met is that if the current circumstances conspire against us, as they could very well do, Guernsey’s finance industry and the relative prosperity and high standard of public services we enjoy today will be gone inside five year just as tomato growing died in the seventies.
This is a time for our leaders to show leadership, for government and private sector to thoroughly understand our present predicament, and to pull together for the common good but not for a fit of pique.
Report abuse
Well said Ian – people like Deputy Jones (who is the worst form of convert to being “Guernsey” with zero Guernsey blood in his veins) believing he speaks for the people of Guernsey and that no-one but he should have a voice because of that – woe betide anyone who crosses him or contradicts him. What’s his answer? Toys out of the pram straight away and boycotts.
And he has the bare-faced cheek to mention humility – unbelievable – practice what you preach. A democracy is where we all can have a say and a logical debate not rantings and petulance. GIBA’s comments have been measured and logical in the light of the taxpayer paying a lot of money for this report.
The States asked the WAO to report and now it has – because its not what people like you want to hear – you want it brushed under the carpet – or perhaps we should do what we usually do in these circumstances and pay another consultant vast sums till we get what you want to hear. In a democracy (I think that is your word for the system we have in Guernsey) this would be properly debated and if the outcome is no change then so be it but we have to adhere to good corporate governance and transparency and so let’s see the debate unfold properly and rather through the pages of the Press which is no way to take matters forward
Report abuse
Ian, you are so right. If there was ever a time for solidarity that time is now. Government and Industry working together complementing each other will be the way we get through the troubled times ahead. Unfortunately what we have at the moment is a seeming overlap in responsibilities. Industry rather than advising Government appears to be telling them how to govern. Deputy Jones and his fellow deputies have received a mandate from the electorate to govern this Island and the leadership of the finance industry need to accept that is the case. I want to see them get together face to face and not communicate using GEP headlines!
Report abuse
Ian Burns excels himself in his rant “Once again Mr Jones and the previous commentator (Mr John) decide to contrast “the people of Guernsey” against both the IOD and GIBA based on their own ill informed prejudices that these Groups are populated by people from overseas who have their own interest at heart. I hear an underlying message which, in my view, smacks of language which is tolerated only because the targets of their comments are generally white and middle class”
Mr Burns where on earth do you get the “white and middle class” from.
My “ill formed prejudice” as you put it reflects my view that those in the organisations you mention appear to care for the interests of their members and not the general population of the island.
As lobbying organisations it is understandable that they look after their members.
Some of us stand up for the rest of the community. Surely even you , Mr Burns can accept that, without making gratuitously insulting comments such as ill informed prejudices and attacking white middle classes.
Report abuse
Ian Burns
When anyone comments on the right to defend the Island and its system of government from many who have come to work here in the first place because of the financial climate that same system has created, they are immediately accused of racism, I may not have a drop of local blood in my body, although all my family were born here but I will continue to defend what we have as long as I am elected to do so. I am not mealy mouthed I say it as I see it and that may be considered by some as outrageous I do not see it like that. I said a few years ago at an IOD conference in response to a banker who told the gathering that the finance industry was fully committed to the island, that the banks are like global fleas, we (Guernsey) just happen to be the dog they have settled on for the time being. What do I mean by that, well it is simple really, if for instance States members decided that we would bend to the wishes of the G4 and move to an executive system of government and a month or so later the outside pressures and demands from the OECD and the EU became so great that we lost our competitive edge the banks and finance business would be gone in a blink of an eye, we would be left with an elected dictatorship for an economy and an island that would be bankrupt. The idea that this industry is committed to Guernsey is nonsensical; it is committed to its shareholders and profits. In the event of such a catastrophe the banks would not say “Oh! we will stay here because we don’t want to leave the islands economy in ruins” they will do what they have threatened to do several times when they don’t get what they want and up sticks and go and anyone who believes that is not true is naive in the extreme and you can be as shy and retiring as you wish but it won’t change the stark truth of the situation. Now I am not saying that people like Ian or the bodies he is a member of should be invisible, I am not at war with any of them, of course not, they contribute collectively the lions share of the wealth created in our economy and most accept that to be the case and incidentally Ian I know exactly how many local people work in the Finance industry as I see the figures on a fairly regular basis through the Housing Control system. I can also tell you that I will stand shoulder to shoulder with all of the G4 in our fight against outside influences and pressures from those who wish to force change upon us as a member of the External Relations Group of the Policy Council I fight ferociously for this island and its right to determine its own affairs and set its own tax rates against those who would attempt to take it from us. This is not as you say a fit of pique it is about business leaders engaging with the system we have not trying to mount some collective take over bid against those who have been legitimately elected.
Report abuse
Mark
Let me explain my rabid support of Guernsey its way of life its history, culture and its people’s right to keep what they have. I married into a local family 32 years, ago a family whose history goes back to the Bayeux tapestry all of them are locally born and all of them without exception are fiercely protective of there island home. They have one thing in common with all of us, they moan about the States, the overdevelopment and over population of their island home and we often fall out over States policy which I support and other things like, paid parking,local architecture, together with a whole range of other domestic issues. Where we are as one is over the issue of our system of government and I will defend that system until a democratic decision in the States decides to change it. I agree with you Mark it is a debate we urgently need to have. All sections of the community have a right to engage in the democratic process and make whatever comments they wish but if they want real change, then they have to be prepared to give up their comfortable jobs and stand for election to bring about that change.
GIBA’s comments on changing our system of government have been made before, long before this latest WAO report came out. Every year someone from GIBA will jump up at the IOD or some other venue calling for executive government, the scrapping of the Housing Licence system along with other comments about the Stares of Guernsey and its members. Every year from the floor of the IOD there are calls for people to stand for a seat in government and every four years they fail to appear, these are not toys out of the pram Ian, these are facts. I was extremely annoyed at the Mongrel comment from Paul Meader but I was not alone in that annoyance amongst States members. I received this from a member of the public.
And I quote
“GIBA, it is made up of several different legs of the industry each having representatives on the Committee. So GIBA is a mongrel of mongrels. And again, like GIBA its hard to see any substance to the AGB – as far as I can ascertain, the hugely overwhelming majority in its industry has no opportunity to vote these people in. So who exactly are they representing? At least the individuals on the mongrel States are elected by the people they serve”. Furthermore, it occurs to me that there may be a number of individuals who are members of more than one of the G4. so for all the Press coverage we get about the G4′s opinion, I see no grounds for believing that they carry any weight”.end of quote.
Getting back to the WAO report, far from wanting it brushed under the carpet, I have joined the Chief Minister in his call to have this report fully debated in the States, I also sent an e-mail yesterday to all States Members supporting a general call for the same thing, so no I don’t want it swept under the carpet. I also agree that we should meet and thrash out these issues as a community rather than through the pages of the Press but I might remind you Ian it was not my headline that started this response, that unfortunately came from the head of GIBA.
Report abuse
Dave Jones
I must take issue with your reference to the “flea on the dog” comment to Ian Burns. You seem to be forgetting that whilst the banks operating in Guernsey may well be beholden to profits and shareholders, a huge number of finance industry businesses including trust companies, fund administrators, advocates and accountants are owned and managed by locally-born and locally-educated professionals who are far removed from the “flea on the dog” definition that you use. We are also the ones paying full taxes hete, unlike the banks ! We have a very strong vested interest in seeing a well-run Guernsey,
as our entire business and personal wealth is tied to Guernsey’s future. Our children were also born here and are being educated here. We all care very deeply about the performance or non-performance of the States of Guernsey. We aren’t fleas and we don’t wish to be jumping onto other dogs although some of us are rapidly realising that we may soon have to if Guernsey’s standard of government does not improve. Attitudes like yours risk killing both the fleas and the dogs and you don’t seem to appreciate that.
You also clearly don’t seem to appreciate that G4 is made up of many of these same locally-born and locally-educated and local taxpaying finance industry business owners. It is not all about the foreign-owned banks ! I think you will also find that the IOD whom you seem to hold a grudge against are also predominantly local and predominantly non-bankers. We most certainly were not guilty of excessive or reckless lending to cause the financial crisis. I would strongly advise you to do some research about the G4′s membership and the IOD membership before making the sort of comments that you seem to be too keen to make when shooting from the hip like you do.
So what exactly is the issue? The island had no choice but to change its tax system so that £80m plus of annual corporate tax was lost. Of course the strategy was built around future growth and that strategy was torpedoed due to the global financial crisis. So we are faced not only with a structural deficit but also with ongoing attacks from new EU regulation. We may well have to raise taxes or introduce new taxes just to survive. That extra tax burden will have to be borne by Guernsey taxpayers. How many of those Guernsey taxpayers will be happy to see big tax rises when we all know that a better-run government with an accountable and controllable public sector could easily generate savings which would reduce or even remove the need for new or higher taxes and who are therefore extremely frustrated at the unwillingness to consider the findings of the WAO? Any competent businessman, when revenues are under pressure, looks very closely at cost-cutting and procedures which will improve profitability without damaging the business. That’s what G4 is asking the States to do.
Report abuse
Mark
As someone who has lived in Guernsey for 15 years but wasnt lucky enough to be born here, I find your xenophobic comment offensive.
Seems to me that every time Dave Jones says something that people dont like, some small minded bigot throws the predictable “he’s not from round here” League of Gentlemen rubbish.
DDJ imo is one of the few current deputies that does genuinely seems to have the islands best interests at heart, stop the press he wasnt born here!!
Report abuse
David I accept completely your point on the huge number of local people who work in the satellite industries you mention, my daughter is one of them. I also accept that some of these companies are also owned by local people. However that does not get away from the inconvenient truth that if the financial landscape in Guernsey changes, because of interference from outside and the island is no longer competitive for certain large banks and finance houses, then they will relocate. The decision on whether this takes place unfortunately will not be made by senior local people, they will be made by people much higher up the food chain in offices in Switzerland, London, Canada, Hong Kong, or wherever and those making the decisions will not care a single jot for local jobs then. Local companies like law firms and accountancy firms get huge amounts of work from the big players and Trust companies need clients to survive, local or not if some of the threats against this type of business from the outside ever come about, it really won’t matter who owns these companies or where your children were born or how much passion or commitment local people have to Guernsey, the business simply wont be there. I might also remind you that Guernsey’s standard of Government has created the environment that has brought this prosperity we have enjoyed for three decades, adjusting where necessary by decisions taken in the States to a very fast moving world, so please don’t lecture me on the States of Guernsey. I have no grudge whatsoever against the IOD or the G4 nor did I say it was local business people that caused the credit crisis, what I said was that this constant clamour from some of these groups that the States needs more business people in it tend to for get that it was members of the IOD albeit in the UK who showed that quite frankly they could not be trusted to run their own businesses properly with the government bailing out the whole thing. Excessive or reckless lending are your words David not mine. On your last point , I supported zero 10 and I stick by that decision as it was exactly the right one for Guernsey at the time and although we are struggling at present because the “growth” part of the strategy is missing but I do believe that will change and green shoots of global recovery will help in that regard. As for government spending I agree there are several areas that need to improve if we are not to raise taxes but even Tribal Helm had to adjust its opinion when they carried out a close inspection of our services and looked at the departments they found they were far better run than they first imagined. Of course there are things we can do to improve things and I am fully signed up to seeing that comes about. However I will remind you again Government is NOT a business and cannot be run like one, no matter how many business people are in the States.
Report abuse
Dave Jones
Sorry but I don’t agree with several of your points.
1. You say: “I might also remind you that Guernsey’s standard of Government has created the environment that has brought this prosperity we have enjoyed for three decades, adjusting where necessary by decisions taken in the States to a very fast moving world, so please don’t lecture me on the States of Guernsey.”
Well, it was Guernsey’s PREVIOUS elected Houses which brought about the prosperity we have enjoyed for three decades, NOt this one. The previous ones were able to spend as they see fit because the annual surpluses kept rolling in (and some would clearly say that they didn’t sufficiently invest in the infrastructure in that time). This current House is the one which is under pressure to cut its cloth accordingly and face up to belt-tightening, something that for the last three decades they weren’t required to do. So my point is totally valid.
2. What on earth has the decisions of the UK branch of IOD got to do with the local IOD, the members of whom are all locally based ? It has no relevance whatsoever and was a very confusing albeit naive comment by you.
3. You are right. Government is NOT a business. But the books need to balance nevertheless and a bloated public sector, unwilling to open its eyes to new working practices and with an unaffordable final salary pension scheme, is unsustainable. People with a business background understand that. Our current elected House, a collection of newsagents, lorry drivers, academics, plumbers, failed businessmen, doctors, housewives, airline pilots etc, with a few notable exceptions, have simply never had to deal with budgets, planning of resources, cost-cutting etc. That’s not a criticism – just simple fact. The States does not need to be run completely like a business, but it certainly does have to be run in a far more businesslike manner than it is currently.
Report abuse
Fine David you don’t have to agree, what a boring blog it would be if you did. This States has been in office for a relatively short period and is wrestling with a number of problems facing the island, the single most important one right now without a shadow of a doubt is the external threats we face. It is true that previous States were in the enviable position of having a great deal more income than we have at present and that issue IS being addressed by T&R and the Policy Council despite all the hype to the contrary. Secondly you are wrong about previous administrations not investing. Here is a list to remind you taken from my speech on external borrowing.
Over the last 30 years or so this assembly and its members have spent millions on the islands infrastructure and here is a list of what has been done over that period to remind you.
A new Dairy
Post office
New Police Station (old St Peter Port Hospital)
New Custom Sheds and offices
New Courts
New Prison and extension
Beau Sejour
5 phases of the hospital development
Several new schools and the
6th form centre.
Fire Station refurb.
4 Marina’s
2 new RO RO ramps
New passenger terminal at SPP Harbour.
New Airport Building
New Jetty re- construction
New cranes at St Sampson Harbour
The Pavilion and running track at Foots Lane
Govt Buildings at Frossard House and Burnt Lane.
States Works Garages and offices at Le Mare
Hundreds of new homes for social housing
And hundreds more refurbished to modern standards.
Main Drainage schemes.
Endless Road schemes and Car Parks (North Beach / Salerie)
Not to mention the replacement of hundreds of govt vehicles from Police cars and fire trucks to sewage and refuse carts vans and pick up trucks. Harbour Boats and pontoons.
On top of that we have spent money on protecting our Fuel Supplies (The 2 Tankers)
And protected our air slots to the UK with the purchase of the islands own airline. And do you know what? All this has all been done by successive States without borrowing a single penny.
As for your point on the IOD the truth is they are all business people whether you are talking about the local branch or the UK branch the argument from the G4 is that we need more business people in the States, my point is that being a “business person” does not necessarily give you more common sense or the ability to govern than any of the other 47 members elected by the public, David there is no evidence whatsoever that business people from one jurisdiction are any brighter or competent than those from another. So I hope that has cleared that up. By the way in your list of deputies and their previous employment you left out Digger Drivers.
Report abuse
There appear to be some unfortunate assumptions building up on this island.
First, it is assumed that all of the business / finance community want executive government. They do not.
Second, it is assumed by those that want executive government that the ability to force decisions through the States will resolve many problems. My view is that it is just as likely to create problems. The system of government does not change the views, opinions or decision making of the individuals, it just makes it easier for a minority to get their view pushed through. If that executive minority has the same views as you then great. But if not…
It goes back to the theory that the perfect form of government is a benign dictatorship. But what are the chances that we will all be happy with the decisions taken by the dictatorship?
I do believe that there need to be more business-minded people in the States in order to readress the balance and ensure that the States reflects the general wants of the population. But if the business and finance community wants this then it needs to get together to find a way to enable business people to take 4 years out without sacrificing their careers or income. You cannot expect the States to suddenly become more corporate just because you give more power to 10 individuals, the choice of which is outside the control of the electorate, the business community or anyone other than the Deputies themselves.
Report abuse
TL
You say “it is assumed that all of the business / finance community want executive government. They do not”
Bit distressing for Editor Digard but what exactly do you and the generic business finance community want?
Is it people that make for good governance or is it the system (dictatorship?) or a mix of the two?
How would you change the governance of Guernsey? I would be most interested to read something concrete.
Report abuse
Dave Jones
Yes, an impressive list but I don’t see Les Beaucamps School, La Mare de Carteret School or a decent sewage system on that list. All things which several elected Houses have obviously deemed unimportant.
I also see lots of capital projects there which have taken place in the past 5 or 6 years, which is a credit to this and the previous House, but doesn’t reflect quite so well on the previous 4 or 5 elected Houses which didn’t seem to like investing in our infrastructure. It has resulted in us paying for so much more in recent years which should have been carried out in the previous 10-15 years when we could have afforded it better, which has placed enormous strain on our financial resources. Dare I say it – if we had needed to make such investment in infrastructure over the previous 10-15 years then maybe, just maybe, the public sector would not have been able to get so unwieldy over such a long period, which has caused it to become the “norm”.
TL and Stephen John
Personally, I don’t have a preference for executive or consensus government. I just want a government which can be trusted to make better decisions (and indeed to actually be prepared to make decisions) and not resort to the farces that we have witnessed over the past 3 or 4 years. I don’t want to see deputy ministers stabbling their own minister in the back. I don’t want to see Ministers voting against their own department’s committee on policy votes in the House. I don’t want to see soap operas like we saw re. the hospital block. I don’t want to see Ministers blocking debates on anything which could actually be in the island’s best interests, including merging departments, undertaking efficiency reviews and working better with Jersey for mutual benefit.
But I don’t know whether its down to the system of government or whether its down to those who have been elected. If you change the system and have the same people in office, would it make a difference ? I doubt it. If you had the same system but with different people elected would it make a difference ? Maybe, maybe not.
Whilst its oftend said that we get the government that we deserve, that it is not true because of the lack of island-wide voting. I have no say whatsoever in whether “Clown X” in another electoral district gets elected, and I also have no say whether or not a wider group of elected Clowns who I could not vote in or out decide to elect that same “Clown X” to a senior ministerial position with a role which is way beyond his capability. That change in electoral process, as well as reducing the number of elected deputies by around 20, would be a huge step in the right direction.
Report abuse
David
I have no doubt the two schools and the new sewage treatment plant will be done in due course the list was posted to show you that successive States have invested millions over the years in the islands infrastructure. You talk about the earlier years and the lack of investment, in fairness to them they didn’t have the income we have today, in an old billet I have here (1976) the islands income for that year was 12 million pounds and it wasn’t really until the mid nineties that we started to get real revenue surpluses and the investment in many of the things I have listed really began in earnest. You also have to remember that at the same time the population was growing significantly and that had to be catered for, so it wasn’t just a case of repairing or renewing what we had but investing many more millions on expansion, I remember for instance when housing was run from a large wooden shed on the Albert Pier. David you and I could go on forever batting this particular ball backwards and forwards and possibly never agree so let’s leave it here.
Report abuse
Dave Jones
Happy to leave it there apart from one crucial point. The island was making a very significant annual surplus (in relative terms) from the mid-1980s for about 20 years. Forget 1976 – the finance industry was in its infancy here at that point. I maintain that we have ended up trying to condense far too many capital funding projects in the past 5 years when finances have got tighter, many of which should have been incurred in the prior decade instead of not spending anything. On the other hand, the failure to spend in that period did result in us having the significant reserves today that we are using to finance zero-10 !
And its got nothing to do with “income”. Its about “net annual surplus”, which is hopefully a positive balance after deducting expenditure from income, and differentiating between revenue and capital expenditure. No wonder the current House has problems with its finances. (That’s meant to be a joke by the way !).
Report abuse
david
I absolutely hate having to appear to take dave jones’s side on an issue but in a democracy the government is supposed to reflect the people. there is no evidence to suggest that business men or women make a better calibre of states member than anyone else.I would prefer to see a diverse make up of the states everybody has to deal with budgets not just businessmen.
dave jones be careful with your references to the wooden hut used to run housing as it was probably more efficient than your housing department is now.
Report abuse
David as I said we will probably not agree and do you know what? it doesn’t matter because all of us whatever our opinions are facing a much bigger problem than domestic tin rattling to see what we have left in the kitty. We have the EU to deal with, that awful saying the “elephant is in the room” is true and at the moment it is trying to crap on our carpet. We as a community will have to fight this EU menace together, as one, with our people, the Jersey people and those from the Isle of Man, although, I am not to down hearted as it was for situations such as this that elephant guns were invented. I have been writing articles and letters to three Chief Ministers for years, before that to members of A&F warning anyone who would listen that the UK government could not be trusted and would eventually sacrifice us on the alter of the EU, I was called a crank and a scaremongering reactionist. I remember once asking in an old Policy Council meeting to those who kept wanting to appease the UK government and their masters in Brussels whether Jack Straw would have to be sitting in the Bailiffs chair in our parliament before they woke up and started to fight back. One of those PC members who now writes a column for the Guernsey Press kept telling me that “this is not the right time to take them on” or “we should be careful and wait and see what happens” several times when a line in the sand should have been drawn the timid amongst us declined.
I keep saying you cannot appease a bully, once you show weakness and pay up they just come back for more. It is true they can use raw power to get what they want but I still believe we can carve a place in the global economy for Guernsey but we will certainly have to show more metal than has been the case in the past. Bring on the fight I say, one thing is for sure we will soon see where business loyalty lays in the coming weeks and months, finding out whether all those solid commitments to Guernsey stack up or not.
Report abuse
working towards a positive future for the Island needs communication between groups and individuals. This is an example of a politician not being able to put consultation and information gathering on behalf of the electorate ahead of his emotions.
“mongrel” can simply be seen as a personal viewpoint of the current system no more no less.
States members please keep communicating with the various bodies represented on the island.
Report abuse
Congrats to DJ for posting a series of the world’s longest paragraphs. Add that to your list of achievements.
Only pulling your leg, Dave.
Report abuse
Come on Russ, surely that isn’t all of your contribution to the discussion.
Surely you have some meaningful input to the discussion.
Report abuse
John
States members are always happy to listen to advice from the business community ,what we are less happy to do is listen to demands.
Russ I will list mine if you list yours.
Report abuse
dave jones
weren’t you a rabid supporter of zero ten?
Report abuse
Kevin yes I was ,it was exactly the right thing to do at the time , we know that because we still have a very buoyant finance sector in Guernsey which would not have been the case if we had become un-competitive and business decided to relocate elswhere, Zero 10 was the least risky option.
Report abuse
dave jones
neither you or anyone else are in a position to say exactly what would have happened with or without zero ten because nobody actually knows. Might I humbly suggest in future that states deputies think carefully before allowing the finance gurus of this world to bully them. Whilst I accept that finance institutions are hard nosed money mad businesses even they need things like accessability, stability and reliability from finance centres.
Report abuse
The politicians have screwed up.
They knew that the proposal to the EU would never carry. They knew that the Code of Conduct compliance would only take place after the regime was made law. They knew that its implementation would destabilise the tax burden causing stress to the public.
They knew they would be running Guernsey into an unprecedented deficit.
They knew they were abusing international tax rules.
All this anti EU nonsense is not the issue. Our politicians lied, directly, about a measure that was in no way whatsoever in Guernsey’s best interests.
We are displaying the very worst characteristics of a tax haven on the world stage. And you’re proud of that, Mr Jones? You’re proud that the very same institutions that would see our States transformed into a finance fast track legislation machine and casting aspersions on previous and forthcoming decisions based on ‘faulty’ procedures, making profit from the trillions of governments’ hand outs, you’re proud that they were laughing all the way to, well, where they work.
And yet any timid noises about asking for a bit of financial help from the wealthy and corps and they puffer-fish and threaten to leave, all at once, on a boat. In the morning.
And it isn’t tax ‘harmonisation’. The zero bit was not the issue.
The Guernsey public have every right to question the integrity of the politicians that shouted loudest for this policy. Deflecting the blame on those countries that the banks on this island are stealing from is utterly pathetic.
David Jones, you are spreading misinformation. That dreadful rant in the Press yesterday could have been lifted from Viz.
You are complicit in the lies. What hope for politics in Guernsey when the top table are dishonest. And ignorant.
How many more of the ‘allegations’ are entirely true?
Report abuse
Kevin you are right I don’t have a crystal ball and being in government is not the same as sitting in an armchair waiting for hindsight. Although I think we can say with a degree of certainty that if we had done nothing at the time when others were moving towards a zero product we would have seen a substantial amount of business fleeing to jurisdictions with more competitive rates of taxation. We took what was the least risky option at the time, which maintained the stability and reliability you speak of, we did not do anything reckless and as a result our economy stayed intact with the inevitable shortfall in our revenue that removing any tax creates. However we remained competitive as a finance centre knowing full well that even though we complied with the EU code of conduct they could still come back at anytime and change the rules, now there is nothing we can do about that, it is their club not ours. We should look at this further meddling as an opportunity to increase our tax take and restore us to surplus, although I would be reluctant to change anything before we get the guarantees from the EU and for that matter the OECD that there will be a level playing field in order that we are not being discriminated against and I think the incoming UK government would at least support that position.
Peter Roffey’s description of this as a white knuckle ride is a great description of where we are but Guernsey is a resourceful fighter and I have absolutely no doubt that we will turn events to our advantage, being a Deputy at this time in the islands history is not a job for the fainthearted and I can only say that as long as I have any say in what goes on we will continue NOT to do anything reckless that would jeopardise our peoples welfare or our ability to generate the income we need to run and maintain our services. Having said that Guernsey has face much harder decisions than this, can you imagine what it must have been like for States members at the time of the occupation to be told to put a white cross up at the airfield to indicate you will show no resistance to the island being invaded by thousands of German troops, now that really was a white knuckle ride.
Report abuse
Arnald
I see you have been reading Murphy again and just “cut and pasting”.
Our politicians did not “lie”. Zero-10 was compliant. The EU simply didn’t like the spirit of it, but it was compliant. So who “lied” and when ? You can’t simply make accusations like that and not back them up. If you are saying that in hindsight we should have paid more attention to the spirit of the code rather than to its wording, then that’s a different question. But its NOT lying !
Report abuse
Do you know what Arnold I haven’t got a clue what you are on about, somebody is screwed up and I am not sure it is the politicians.
I will try and deal with some of it, I am very proud that we are a low tax jurisdiction also could you identify which international tax rules we have broken ,are you saying that only HIGH tax rates are acceptable under international rules whatever that means, most countries have their own tax rules and laws. You say our politicians lied, perhaps you can tell me which bit of Zero 10 was a lie, was it compliant? Yes, did we retain our core finance business in Guernsey after the decision? Yes.
8,000 people work in the finance and related industries in Guernsey, 7,400 of them are local people who rely on those jobs we preserved by going to Zero 10, to pay their rents and mortgages feed and clothe their families so it was in Guernsey’s best interest after all. Who are the banks stealing from? What a ridiculous statement, the banks are carrying out perfectly legitimate and lawful business around the globe. As for the “zero bit was not the issue” again you have lost me, the zero bit is exactly what this latest assault on us is about and it has everything to do with the EU wanting uniformed tax rates.
This anti EU nonsense as you call it is also exactly the issue and is perfectly justified, The EU is a corrupt, obsessively controlling organisation that wishes and has achieved the removal of the rights and freedoms of over 500 million people in its grasp to govern themselves and to determine their own destiny which it has managed to achieve through a series of extremely damaging treaties signed by pens of treachery, the eradication of any real democratic decision making process in the sovereign parliaments of its member states, effective power across the whole of Europe has been transferred to Brussels. Arnold I am bored with this now ,over to you.
Report abuse
David
It is categorically an untruth. I haven’t cut and pasted anything. Someone else pointed it out before he did.
We could not be compliant because we hadn’t asked the EU, and it would have been approved until after legislation. Where is the proof that we were acceptable?
This, as Satan Rumsfeld would say, is a known, known. Giba have admitted they knoew it would happen. Shifting the burden callously onto locals for the direct enrichment of non local, disinterested multinats, who benefit from the centuries of tax payer derived stability, services and legislative independence, could be undone because of promoting tax abuse into other countries.
And I say tomato.
We were never ‘fully EU compliant’, we thought we were. We were sold it under the auspices of growth. So in fact what’s happened is that massive amounts of other countries’ tax payers cash, say $15T and rising, has been sucked in to reward failure, that has benefitted our avoidance industry which was fleecing them anyway, and the very institutions that are bathing in milk and honey DEMAND that we were to cut services, even though they pay no tax themselves, and we get fleeced too.
Is that what businessmen call ‘value for money’?
So yeah, David, I stand by what I say, because unless someone can prove otherwise, that’s what’s what.
Why should a socially useless industry be so damaging?
And this sloppy spin about the EU bullies. It’s an insult. I heard Dave Jones get taken apart with a few facts on the radio phone in. Building up a resentment towards our market and a faux national pride for an industry that undermines the opportunities for others is an unwanted insight into a surreal alternate reality.
Roffey’s ‘it’s the pound in the pocket that matters to the locals’ may well be true, but how progressive is providing that ‘perk’ without explaining the implications of a growth in tax abuse schemes? Are we saying that Guernsey people wouldn’t mind who had us over a barrel as long as they can buy a few beads and trinkets from ‘the foreign man with the big smile’?
You talk about people who understand the nature of this beast as if they were crackpots, but really, the rest of the world is laughing at us. Those secret crooks.
A failed system that’s been exploited for too long. Why don’t you use your obvious education and expertise to understand the issues instead of hiding behind overcharging rich idiots for mismanaging their cash – that’s a generic you not you, you, as you may be a messenger or the lady that polishes the plants for all I know.
Let’s start losing this dependence on chicanery. The pool will get smaller and smaller, and local taxes will rise, and the whole lot will be forgotten except for the history books damning verdict.
Will we see charity boxes in newsagents? Bankers Plight And Pollies Pride Appeal 2010.
Get a ribbon (£250 to you, or £300 cash)
Report abuse
Dave Jones
You were categorically dismantled on the phone in. You honestly don’t know what you are talking about. It’s quite sweet. You can blame the EU for everything if you like and make a political stance, but back it up with some facts. You tried and for me at least, having a brain, you were very unconvincing. Wrong target chosen based on personal hatred. You actually supported the Czech Rep President. The fact that he has some rather unsavoury views and allegiances makes it OK?
Enemy of my enemy and all that.
Or do you agree that commemorating the Waffen SS
is a perfectly valid stance in today’s climates?
Being populist is fine. You’re good at it. But it can lead to admissions you may regret. That Dave Cameron will do more to damage the UK at home and abroad with his naivety and posturing than the EU would tolerate if were cooperating.
Our meat is very definitely every one elses poison.
Who mentioned high taxes?
Do you know what we sell here?
Report abuse
SJ says it’s a shame that more politicians are unprepared to comment in relation to Mr Meader’s attack on our system of government.
See below an e-mail I sent Mr Meader in response to his “mongrel” comments, which he had circulated to all States members a couple of weeks ago.
Dear Mr Meader,
Thank you for advising me of your views on this matter.
I must say that my immediate response is: plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose. While I appreciate your having taken the trouble to contact me, and while I fully respect your right to make known your views on this matter and all others, my experience is that your opinion of our system of government is generally diametrically opposed to the vast majority of the people who elected me to the States of Deliberation.
It should be remembered that in 2002 the democratically-elected members of the States of Deliberation voted to reject cabinet government and retain consensus government by the rather convincing margin of 47 votes to 8. Prior to that debate on the machinery of government, and despite a sustained and aggressive campaign for ministerial government led by the print media and the very small number of people who tend to speak for business representative organisations, a professional polling company found that fewer than one-quarter of our population wished to live under a system of cabinet government. I believe that there remains very little enthusiasm among the general public for the system of government you appear to favour.
Earlier this year a majority of States members, democratically elected as recently as April 2008, wrote an open letter to their constituents assuring them that they would make every effort to maintain and strengthen consensus government and stating categorically their opposition to cabinet government. And several of the members who declined to sign that letter for various reasons also made it clear privately that they did not support the introduction of cabinet government in Guernsey, as envisaged by the Harwood Report to which your e-mail refers. Thus it would appear that the continuation since 2002 of the aforementioned sustained but enormously unrepresentative campaign for cabinet government has had very little, if any, impact on the political views of the people elected to run the island on behalf of its inhabitants.
Incidentally, your e-mail contains the following: “This review [Harwood II, as you call it] must be wide ranging and must embrace the community’s views, not just those of the States. But most importantly, once its findings are delivered they must be implemented as a coherent package, not picked to pieces once again.” Are you seriously suggesting that Guernsey’s machinery of government should undergo radical structural change and that the form of that change should be determined ultimately not by democratically-elected politicians but by unelected and unaccountable individuals, such as, if the occasion of the last review is indicative, politicians from other jurisdictions, lawyers, auditors and Jurats? Did you really intend as part of the release you sent members to convey the impression that you and your organisation harbour such utter contempt for the concept and values of democracy so as to propose that democratically-elected politicians should abrogate to unelected individuals the responsibilities of political decision-making which they, and only they, have been handed by their constituents? Perhaps you did not intend to convey that impression, but it is very difficult to interpret that part of your release in any other way.
I am a relative newcomer to front-line politics, but I have tried to spend some considerable time doing my best to examine issues related to our machinery of government. Having done so, I am certain that consensus government – or, if you are more familiar with the terminology of local government in the UK, the modified committee system – remains the most appropriate form of government in Guernsey. In a non-party political culture, cabinet government would be infinitely inferior in many, many ways. It is ironic, given your views on this matter, that consensus government has been, and remains, demonstrably beneficial to the interests of the finance industry locally as well as to the interests of other sectors of the economy, and to the general well-being of our island home and its people.
I would be very happy for you and I to debate this matter more thoroughly, preferably in an open forum accessible to the general public, or on the airwaves of local radio. I am very confident that it would be relatively straightforward to demonstrate the appropriateness of consensus government in Guernsey and to refute the largely ill-informed arguments put in support of cabinet government, most often by a tiny number of people whose views remain very much on the periphery of mainstream popular opinion.
Of course, GIBA has every right to continue contributing to discourse on any subject it chooses, but before it does so next perhaps it would be kind enough to bear in mind that whereas it exists only to represent the necessarily narrow interests of its few member companies, States members are elected to balance the often competing interests of all the people and various sectors of our society. For that very reason of ensuring that competing interests are balanced, it is important for any society to ensure that democracy is respected. Before I became a politician, I always found the following five questions a useful reminder of in whose hands I wanted responsibility for decision-making to properly rest:
1. What power have you got?
2. Where did you get it from?
3. In whose interests do you exercise it?
4. To whom are you accountable?
5. How can we get rid of you?
Sorry that there appears to be little common ground between us on the subject of our machinery of government. But please do feel free to get in touch on this matter, or any other, at your convenience for however long I remain in the States. I am sure that all members are always pleased to receive correspondence, even where views are hostile to their own.
Best wishes,
Matt Fallaize
Report abuse
Arnald
there used to be a dog on Tony Blackburns Radio 1 show called Arnald and he was barking too.
Report abuse
Ha ha! Dave Jones. Saturday morning show on R1 before DLT. Late 70s? Early 80s? It was the worst sound effect in dog simulation history.
I am pleased with that analogy.
“Hey Arnald with an A, what do you think of tax dodgers?”
“woof woof”
“That’d be right you commie”
Report abuse
Dave Jones
You have now completely extinguished your credibility. You listened to Tony Blackburn !
(Sorry but I thought some humour was long overdue).
Report abuse
Sorry but I did, it was one part of my life I am not proud of.
Report abuse