2

Dave Jones

Marc Guerin
Marc it was the PAC (Public accounts committee that asked for the review) why is a question many of us are still asking? As for this weeks debate on the PAC and the WAO basically came down to whether the PAC had the right to go outside its mandate what the majority of States members said was that it agrees there is room for improvement but it did NOT want cabinet or an executive system of government, that is what the Press wants and some of the business community want, simply because they believe it will be much easier to control. And make no mistake; this has always been about power and control. Do you seriously want all the decisions that effect your life being made by a handful of the political elite behind closed doors, decisions that may be in the best interests of those who can bring financial and commercial pressure to bare on a few well placed senior members of the States, rather than decisions made in the best interests of all the community. Much of what has been suggested in these reviews is already being acted upon, I see it everyday in Frossard House and through correspondence via the Treasury and from the cut backs that are unfortunately necessary if we want to keep our taxes and charges at reasonable levels. This whole hysteria of this WAO report is based on results of interviews with about 150 people, the irony of some of those interviews is that they were given by people who have been in the position to improve things and have not done so for years.

Report abuse

4

Marc Guerin

Thankyou Dave for making it a bit clearer,but the question still remains, will we ever find out why the review was needed by someone, and more to the point, Why did the results come back as they did? And what were the intentions ?

Report abuse

6

Dave Jones

MG

There is nothing wrong with the PAC commissioning the review it was the way the whole thing was handled. This pretty flimsy report is based on interviews with about 150 people, some ironically who have been in positions within the States structure for many years who could have addressed many of these issues a long time ago. The Auditor general talks about weaknesses in our governance, not about total failure, he states quite clearly in his report and I quote, “we found a number of examples of good practice within and across States departments” end quote. Don’t expect to read any of the positives statements from the report in the Guernsey Press. As you may have gathered from some of my public uttering’s, I am not a huge fan of this type of review as the people carrying them out invariably know little about us or the kind of unique community we have created, much of it on purpose to suit Guernsey’s needs, not those from elsewhere. Those from outside tasked with carrying out these reviews often find it difficult to understand the structure that makes the whole thing work, that is because there are no other consensus form of government out there to compare it with. Much of what we do may very well be unconventional but it is not wrong, it is just different, it is tailored to OUR needs not those of the UK or the European Union and as I keep repeating, we sometimes trade a little efficiency for quality of service. We don’t always fit the model of everywhere else and nor should we. What most of these reports say, is that you don’t do things here like we do them in the UK. Well I for one am very pleased about that and long may it continue.

Report abuse

8

Darren

Dave Jones.

A few questions and then we can consider the merits of WAO’s audit.

1 – What is the size and structure of Guernsey’s Governance team, i.e. Internal Audit & Risk Assurance

2 – How many employees are there in 1 above

3 – What qualifications have these people got to ensure up-to-date knowledge of such assurance and governance matters?

I find it hard to believe that a civil servant such as yourself, is openly critical of an audit that was commissioned by Guernsey’s Government for the benefit of Guernsey. To state that ‘they little about us and our unique community’ is based on what exactly?

Facts are this.

Guernsey has innefectual governance.

If the governance in place was effective there would be no 2010 black hole, little overspend on major projects such as Beau Sejour, New Jetty, Prison, Schools et al.

Good Governance is about objectivity and efficient and effective management of resources. All you seem to do Deputy Jones is ‘wind and rain’ about subjects for which you have limited knowledge.

Do you really believe that the WAO, who audit multi million pound government entities for the UK, who examine value for money with the MOD, schools, universities, infrastructure etc would not have an appreciation of a small, low value bailiwick such as Guernsey?

You really are a dope of the highest magnitude.

The reality is Governance in Guernsey is substandard – there is no qualified audit manager, no qualified risk and assurance person, and the reporting and internal assurance function has no ‘credence’ or as you would neolithically put it, ‘teeth’.

The Public Accounts Committee are probably sick to death of hopeless politicians such as you wasting taxpayer funds on projects and programmes of work that are hardly essential to Guernsey’s fiscal sustainability. Further more PAC have witnessed Dave Clark (previous Treasurer and mate of Lindon Trott) waste all of the financial buffer on projects that should have been seperated into Tranches for effective fiscal management.

Dave-perhaps you should stick to commentating on things you are knowledgable about, such as carrots.

Report abuse

10

Dave Jones

Darren

You should clearly stand for the States as your grasp of things is certainly superior to 30 States members who supported the Fallaize Requete on the WAO report many of them making the same points as I. Secondly I am not a civil servant I am a public servant as a serving States member.

No 1
The States internal Audits are carried out by one of the major independent Audit companies with full cooperation given by T&R. This is a contract and works very well. The number of employees is a matter for them and their qualifications likewise but I doubt that you would last very long with one of these major audit firms if you were not equal to the task. My views on the WAO are based on what they have told us privately and the inability of the Director General to answer even basic questions on the workings of our system of government or the committee system of delivering services to our people, they tell us that we don’t do things like they do in the UK well for me that is good news and it doesn’t make our system wrong, just different. I clearly have a lot more knowledge about what is going on than you do, I sit in high level meetings every week discussing these issues in depth, so if you wish to insult me that’s fine, I have a very thick hide but as a Minister I am well aware of the subject matter of all these reports, I just don’t happen to agree with some of their conclusions and I can tell you I am not alone in that view around the Policy Council table. I am not sure what you do but I don’t remember anyone called Darren siting around the same tables.

The WAO report does NOT say the Guernsey has “ineffectual governance” and if it is your opinion then you are wrong, many as for the overspends you refer too, they are historic the majority of them being the old Board of Administration contracts and there has not been an overspend since the machinery of government changes and the Policy Council was formed back in 2004. As for the black hole, this is as a result of the EU code of conduct directive on taxation nothing to do with overspends it was set in motion by outside interference in our affairs pure and simple. We could either comply or loose our right to trade on the European money markets, you choose.
Your point on the WAO carrying out Audits on UK government departments means what exactly? We have out performed the UK on every level for years The States has managed with some skill, to maintain all our major public services at levels many countries would be envious of, given the limited income we have and they have done it without significantly raising taxes or charges on our people, and more importantly we have managed to do all of this without borrowing a single penny from anyone. We have little option other than to continue to support those who drive this economy and if we had a blank sheet of paper, none of us would start from here but unless any of you know of a group of secret growers who are about to revive tomato exports to the levels of the 70’s and 80’s, or perhaps a cunning plan that will bring back the huge numbers of tourists to this island we enjoyed in those years generating millions of pounds. Then I suggest we all take a reality check. This is not a game; it’s about a fight for survival, in an increasingly hostile world where we were fortunate enough to find a very lucrative industry to replace those that for whatever reasons have all but disappeared. So Zero 10 will stay until the States decide otherwise and we will continue to fill our deficit through growth and any new corporation tax rates. As for the rest of your post it is not worthy of response.

Report abuse