Train wreck decision has a high cost
Tuesday 2nd March 2010, 4:17PM GMT.
LOOKING back on the fiasco that has been the start, stop and then abandonment of the island’s waste strategy, it is tempting to ask, what on earth has the States done?
While the visceral reaction to that question depends on whether you are pro- or anti-incinerator (for whatever reason), the fact is that no one really knows the answer.
The consequences and cost of cancelling the Suez contract will take months or years to unfold, Guernsey has no idea today how it is going to deal with its refuse and islanders and States members have not a clue what efforts or sacrifices will be required in order not to have an energy from waste plant.
What is certain, however, is that last Friday’s debate demonstrated government at its worst. One of the key tests of good governance is taking informed, transparent decisions and managing risk. Doing a volte face after a secret session and voting for who knows what ticks none of those boxes.
Additionally, the position the island now finds itself in – a minority of the Assembly reversing an earlier decision – is directly as a result of the States failing to follow the recommendations on members’ interests made by the Wales Audit Office when it looked at the PEH clinical block affair.
By any standards, this was a train wreck of a decision-making process and the only reason the cries of derision have been muted is that Public Services’ proposals were so universally unwanted.
The other unsatisfactory element of this is the secret session of the States itself.
What compelling new information emerged that islanders cannot be told but deputies can?
By that stage, the issue was swinging on the consequences of cancelling the contract with Suez. The cost was put in the Billet d’Etat at £3.2m. with a dire warning of other ‘significant’ but unquantified financial and legal risks.
What can be deduced from members going ahead and cancelling despite that warning is that the secret part of the debate heard that the damages hinted at were actually far less severe than PSD gave islanders and deputies to understand.
So PSD has potentially misled the House, has had years of work thrown back at it but now says that it has seen the light and will work on a green alternative.
It simply doesn’t wash – and is yet another reason why the PSD members should resign and seek a fresh mandate to hold office.
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
Two points
The writer says “a minority of the Assembly reversing an earlier decision”. most would say the majority of those who voted reversed the decision.
The Comment writer also says
“What can be deduced from members going ahead and cancelling despite that warning is that the secret part of the debate heard that the damages hinted at were actually far less severe than PSD gave islanders and deputies to understand”
I wonder if some friendly deputy has spilt the beans to Mr Editor, or is this a crafty move to flush out the true cost?
More worrying is the admission in the Billet that PSD and Treasury were unaware of the actual cost of not signing a contract.
Or is this another example of misinformation?
Report abuse
This is an odd editorial especially as the people who write it purport to be the “voice of Islanders” It also assumes that those of us who voted out the Suez proposals have not had informed, transparent information or have a clue how to manage risk. Why does the Press believe that all the information from PSD was forensically accurate, while all other waste management experts who don’t believe in incineration have given us information that is suspect? Has the Editor forgotten that in the end two members of PSD believed that there is a workable alternative despite being on a board that has been bombarded with pro incinerator information? Those two members believed that if the States signed up to waste minimization then they could get rid of the incinerator. PSD on several occasions gave the States the opportunity to turn this option down, they even offered a couple of get out of jail cards and as for misleading the House they brought to the States what the States had required them to do. One of the get out of jail cards was an opportunity to take incineration out of the procurement process altogether but the States decided not to take that opportunity. The other was to get into early talks with Jersey on shipping waste to them and paying them to deal with it, the States also threw that option out at the time. Deputy Ogier said in his speech on Friday that the waste minimization strategy would require everyone to come on board, he even mentioned the Guernsey Press getting behind this initiative, precious little hope of that I fear, when the so called “voice of islanders” treats the views of a substantial number of islanders with such distain.
Report abuse