States fails again
Friday 23rd April 2010, 2:30PM BST.
Chief Minister Lyndon Trott’s decision to meet airport firefighters and bring the dispute to an end was vindicated by the Tribunal of Inquiry, which said the origins of the dispute lay in the system of government. (Montage by John O’Neill, 0956442b)
A FAILURE at the heart of government led to the airport firefighters’ walkout, an independent Tribunal of Inquiry has found.
In its report, released today, the tribunal cleared the firefighters of blame and vindicated Chief Minister Lyndon Trott for his role in helping to bring the industrial action to an end.
The report has suggested far-reaching recommendations that would change the way the States negotiates pay deals with its staff, communicates across departments, and handles crises.
‘The failure to deal with the underlying problem, which led to the industrial action by the firefighters, stems from the system of government which does not encourage either a corporate approach or collective responsibility,’ the tribunal said in the report.
‘There was a systemic failure to act in a corporate and strategic manner.’
- Read the report’s recommendations in the Guernsey Press. See below for subscription details.
- To read Guernsey Press stories in full click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.
Island Life
All about Guernsey
Ambassador of the Year 2011
History & Heritage
Visitor Information
Guernsey's government
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
Useful Links
Lyndon Trott, at a time the Island needed you most, you stepped in and made Guernsey proud by making the right decision.
The people of Guernsey thank you for keeping our airport open following some very stressful closures of our airport. Well done.
Report abuse
Yet more money spent on foreigners telling us where Lyndon went wrong. I think what he did he was good, he got the planes going again.
Report abuse
Ho-hum. Yet another report saying the way public sector pay is negotiated is wrong.
Wonder when something is going to be done about it?
Report abuse
Yeah, and where are all those posters that were deriding the firefighters?
Report abuse
GG, did you read the article at all? Or do you not bother with that any more before you comment?
Report abuse
So you’ve not bothered reading the report then, GG?
Report abuse
Rossco
I think you`d be better to speak for yourself rather than the people of Guernsey as i`m one of them and you dont echo my thoughts
Report abuse
Take note. April 23,2010 at 5.05pm ….
Arnald has expressed a view on a heading other than tax shenanigans
Welcome to the rest of the big wide world Arnald,and I mean that from the heart of my bottom
Report abuse
hey Mat – how many people does it take to convince you that the system of government is broke? Or if you put your head in the sand for long enough you wont hear it and it might go away and all be magically healed? Guess these guys are wrong too?
Report abuse
On the apron with no hi viz??
Report abuse
Independent Tribunal of Inquiry.
I didnt see the press, who made up this body of people, does anyone know?
Report abuse
GG – did you read the article? it says that Lyndon was vindicated. So it seems that you and the “foreigners” are in agreement – I hope that does not cause you to go into meltdown.
Report abuse
Hi GG – have you read the article? It says the report vindicated Lyndon!
Report abuse
The fire fighters have been vindicated – the public vilification of them, although understandable, was appalling. The real people at fault (the PSRC) are now saying they knew their practices were outdated, so they are surely culpable as they did NOTHING to change them. How many other public sector workers will now be looking at the outcome of this and thinking that perhaps they have a case? The PSRC wasted a huge amount of tax payers money, allowed the pay talks to linger on for several years until they came to such a point that the fire fighters were backed into a corner. It appears that their only recourse to ensure something changed was to refuse to work overtime (they never went on strike). If they had not had a strong enough union to take this action, the appalling practices of the PSRC would have continued – probably to the detriment of Guernsey plc. Lyndon Trott took a brave step – but now the States as a whole has to take an even bigger one and accept that the way public sector pay is negotiated has to change – and change quickly before another group decide that enough is enough.
Interesting days ahead I think.
Report abuse
Exactly my point lads, I could’ve told ya that, not a £100,000 report.
Report abuse
Jack (obite),
I wouldn’t describe Guernsey’s system of government as “broke”, as you do above, but I do agree that where weaknesses are identified there should be vigorous efforts to improve. That’s why I took a Requete to the States in January to provoke a report that will consider how our system of government might best address any deficiencies in governance.
But if you’re asking me whether I have suddenly become a supporter of cabinet or ministerial government, the answer is no. The case against cabinet government in Guernsey will remain overwhelming unless or until political parties emerge. The one without the other would merely replace one set of problems with another and very definitely worse set of problems.
Report abuse
GG,where exaclty did the other postings include you points?.
Also foreigners can be very useful for running a fresh eye over a subject particularly as some of the eyes are of the variey that they are none so blind as those that will not see.
Report abuse
Bristol flyer, the credit for the photo states “(Montage by John O’Neill, 0956442b)” if you don’t understand what Montage means look it up in a dictionary!
Report abuse
Good on you Lyndon,now lets erk some more money out the damn locals to support the financial services
Report abuse
Yes Toni Bandinee
Because using public money (although maybe not as much as some detractors would like to think) to aid the attraction of business from countries such as India, where, as I type, there is serious investigation into money laundering from none other than their IPL, backed by senior governmental and industrial figures, fills me with confidence that there can only be trickle down gains for our society.
Big names, big cash, big worries on how good our CDD is.
Is it really worth it? Same goes for China, an unknown quantity but with their own havens of Macau and Hong Kong, not least Singapore.
Surely co-operative interaction with the EU is preferable than opening up the risk of being ties to high-net worths from known corrupt countries.
It has to be said, and it is obvious really, that I don’t understand this idea that we can grow our financial services forever without dipping into the mirk.
Report abuse
Defo agree wid u hre Toni, needa steal all da moni off da darn localz eh, all der bad spelling.
Report abuse
Thanks Mat for responding – appreciate your time. Some points / observations / views
Problem is your racket prevents any constructive change!
Many think the system is broke – so far anyone who disagrees with you is ignored and dismissed!
How are you going to bring about effective corporate governance and collective responsibility with current system?
How many people have to say the system is broke before we get listened to!
Icing on the cake was Garrit on phone in today – PAC could have done as good a job if not better than the Tribunal! Demonstrates the underlying problem of our government – most deputies are well intentioned (not all!) but a large group probably 20 or so in words of AA Milne, are bears with very little brains, but most worringly they think they have enormous brains – a very dangerous combination!
Really interested to hear how you think you can make the current system work and if you dont think the current states are covering themselves in ignominy then I bloney despair!
Report abuse
Matt Fallaize
If you dont agree its broke, do you agree its failing?
Report abuse
Matt – hello, anyone? Is there any deputy out there?
what are your solutions to make the awful system we have work?
Report abuse
Jack (obite),
That a majority of members in this Assembly seem to support the system of goverment by committees and consensus does not mean those who take a contrary view are ignored or dismissed. It’s just that they have failed to make anything like an adequate case for changing to a system of ministerial or cabinet government.
You ask when the States is going to listen on this issue. But if there is such popular enthusiasm for ministerial government, I wonder why not one single candidate stood at the 2008 election proposing such a system? And why, when the people of the island were last polled in 2002, did three-quarters of them not favour ministerial government?
Re collective responsibility: with respect, it depends what you mean by that term.
If you mean to imply the need to strengthen accountability and responsible decision-making, theoretically a committees-based system and a cabinet-based system are equally capable of meeting that challenge.
But if you mean something akin to the principle of ‘cabinet collective responsibility’ on the Westminster model, that is simply incompatible with our committees-based system. The absence of political parties would render unworkable the practice of forcing politicians not to disagree in public, and its enforcement would rely on ministers obtaining the personal patronage of the Chief Minister – hardly a basis for transparent and democratic government.
I have no philosophical objection to cabinet government. In a party political system it may well be the most effective form of government. But in a non-party culture, such as Guernsey, it is a ludicrous notion which carries enormous risk.
You ask how governance arrangements might be improved within the present model. I have just sent the Public Accounts Committee a paper on that subject. It runs to 40-odd pages, so I have plenty of ideas, no doubt some of which you would agree with and some you would strongly disagree with. I don’t think I can satisfactorily summarise it in a few sentences here. In any event, I want to see what PAC makes of my paper first, as part of their review of governance. But I would be pleased to discuss this subject in more depth should you wish to e-mail or call me at your convenience.
Simon,
Like any government, I think this one does many things rather well, some things rather less well, and a few things very badly indeed. What I don’t accept is that changing the underlying system of government – to a ministerial model – would provoke any improvement in the delivery of government.
It’s interesting that whereas in most of the rest of the world, failures are blamed on the party/parties which happen to be in government at that time, in Guernsey, because there are no parties, the system of government itself tends to bear much of the criticism, usually unjustifiably.
Report abuse
Matt Fallaize
Thats an interesting possition for you to take because it seems to me, if the system of government itself didnt fail here, than you must consider it a failure of the personnel ?
Report abuse
If the inspectors identify a weakness in a school, a police force, a prison or a fire and rescue service; they don’t go on to suggest that the whole system of education, law enforcement, etc. are changed. Rather, they make recommendations regarding the level of support, the current management model and the type of training, etc. needed to render the service providor more effective.
Guernsey’s system of government is stable and broadly effective. Standard and Poors would hardly have afforded the AAA rating if it were otherwise.
That said, weaknesses exist and are identified by a range of reports, commentators, etc. Like many organisations, the States needs to listen and to act upon such recommendations as are likely to improve the operational effectiveness of our governance arrangements without undermining or seeking to destroy a situation which many in other jurisdictions view with some envy.
Lest readers doubt my last statement, I can confirm that discussions I have had with parliamentarians from many other jurisdictions leads me to believe that they would willingly adopt our non-party consensus system if it were possible.
Report abuse
For all of you who keep telling us that our system of government is broke and it has somehow failed the people. Let me remind you all that under the present system the island has achieved quite astonishing levels of prosperity. Yesterday it secured a triple A credit rating based on its stability and the prudent and far sighted management of our fiscal affairs. The present system of government managed to steer Guernsey through one of the most volatile and difficult financial periods ever faced by a single States administration, In doing so it has gained the continued respect and support of the business community and although highly controversial at the time, the firm decision made by the States on zero 10 resulted in business pouring into the island, which in turn secures jobs and safeguarded the incomes and the futures for thousands of our people. We did change the system significantly in 2004 and since that time there has NOT been one single overspend on a government project since the Policy Council was formed. Under the present system we have managed to do things many other governments have failed to achieve under executive systems. We have rebuilt our infrastructure as we could afford to do it spending what we could by consensus. We have over the years had a new dairy, new police station, new customs facilities, two new RO RO ramps, three new marinas, new cranes at St Sampson harbour, new States workshops and offices, new grammar school, Oak vale school, the New Le Rondin school, a new performing arts centre, a brand new high school a new government building (however awful) in the Charotterie, several phases of a new hospital including a brand new Clinical block together with a new hospital in Alderney, a new nurses home, new airport, new courts, a new sheltered housing scheme (Roseaire Avn) New training flats for the NCH, a new leisure centre, not to mention several new road improvement schemes and together with renewing the islands fresh water network and extending the foul drainage network all of which has cost millions, and there are probably other facilities I can’t think of for a minuet, We have saved this island from committing future generations to an old “dinosaur” incinerator and increased recycling to levels never thought possible. We have 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, without levying draconian tax raising measures and charges on our people, and we have managed to do all of this without borrowing a single penny from anyone. We have no national debt and for the first time in the history of the States, it has put together a properly thought out business plan for the future of Guernsey, which will not only help with future financial planning but will allow a new States to prioritise future projects and expenditure. It is true that some of the items in the GBP will take time and money, which will be a challenge I grant you. We have done all this without the help of the armies of consultants we seem to be presently obsessed by and I would argue that most of the things that have gone wrong have been on the advice from people from outside the island.
We are far from perfect as a government I grant you, we are made up of ordinary people working in a consensus forum taking complex and difficult decisions, sometimes we do get it wrong and often we take a considerable time to make up our minds on some issues, We still have several vital projects yet to do, not least the Castel hospital and the Airport runway and Le Beaucamps school. I have every confidence that a future States will take each of these projects in turn and we will manage just as we have always done to do them as we can afford them. This is how Guernsey has always managed in the past; we built up our infrastructure as we could afford it. We have done all of this under our present system of government and we have clearly under this system out performed most of the countries that surround us Most of the arguments going on in the UK in the run up to the general election are about where government has failed a party system and cabinet led and in the opinion of many who live in the UK a disaster. We should be proud of all we have achieved.
Report abuse
@ Dave and Sean: S&P also gave a AAA rating to the CDO at the centre of the current Goldman Sachs fraud…………
Report abuse
Dave Jones
I welcome your post above, I think its important to be possitve about our collective achievements.
Some would say we have achieved this despite our failing government, just think what we could have achieved if things had been different in that regard!
Report abuse
Simon
I think that this list of achievements shows clearly that successive governments have NOT failed. We have out performed most places on the planet, on a very modest income and without borrowing a penny. A list of real achievements that most countries would be extremely envious of.
Report abuse
Well spotted, Greg!
Report abuse
Dave Jones
Agreed,we don’t do too badly at all.
One of the biggest gripes I suppose is the pathetic speed that bedevils the workings of the Assembly
Report abuse
@ Sean…still we’re a long way off Greece’s current rating. :)
Report abuse
Ray
you will get no argument from me on that point, except to say that we can move preety quick when we are forced to ,the Fuel ships is a good case in point.
Report abuse
Hello Dave (you are my wife now! LOL!)
Thanks for the comprehensive reply and list of achievements- the one achievement that I think you actually should take credit for was the zero ten decision despite the current situation – why only that one – well it was unpopular and needed leadership from government. Nothing else on your list was actually a tough decision – in fact to a cynic perhaps they were just vote winners – Performing Arts Centre or waste water treatment plant – which is critical infrastructure? Have we invested in key projects – the runway is falling apart and how many arm chair experts have we got in states?
Saying what we have works is IMHO simply denial – and as I have said elsewhere here we have two many well intentioned but incompetent deputies – will you stand again on a mandate to reduce the number of deputies in the states? Why have ten departments why have five Board members etc?
matt – thanks for your detailed response too and yes would love to get in touch – how do I email you?
Report abuse
GG.
No, that wasn’t your point exactly. You said “Yet more money spent on foreigners telling us where Lyndon went wrong”. But your point was totally void because the ‘foreigners’ did not say Lyndon went wrong at all. I suspect you didn’t know what vindicated means.
Report abuse
jack(obite)
Since Matt is busy at the moment try Phone book,
page 4,5 inches up in the right hand column
Report abuse
jack (obite)
All these projects I listed span over 30 years and I never said they were “tough” decisions I merely point out that they were successful decisions. The point of illustrating them is to show that successive governments have not failed the people and have invested millions in the islands infrastructure and public services for the benefit of the people of Guernsey. Zero 10 was an extremely difficult call to make but the truth of the matter is that as a result of that decision we kept our lucrative finance business. Since that decision was made more business has come Guernsey’s way. Now it is not our fault if the EU has moved the goal posts again and we will give measured consideration to what we do next with corporate taxation. The runway is NOT falling apart, it needs substantial refurbishment and that project will be before the States shortly. If it truly was falling apart all flights would be grounded under CAA regulations, so please don’t make it up as you go along. Our system of government as Sean says is envied around the world and I will not stand at the next election on a manifesto that calls for reducing the number of States members bringing as a result the people of Guernsey an elected dictatorship, with the Civil Servants making all the back room decisions.
That is of course if I stand at all, I was hoping some of you might stand and come and show us how easy it is to govern Guernsey.
Report abuse
cheers Ray.
Hello Dave – on reflection the zero ten decision was before the May 2008 election so cant think of any tough difficult decisions the current states has had to take! Primary schools – ducked, waste – ducked, see if you can find an example from the current motley crew! the fundamental problem is there are too many of you and too few talented deputies – but turkeys are not going to vote for christmas.
Report abuse
Chief Minister Lyndon Trott did what a Chief Minister should do, he saw a situation that was going out of control and acted! . For that he should get the credit he deserves.
The situation was the direct result of an antiquated inflexible system of determining States Workers pay.
Nor did the problems with the system develop overnight; the need to change it has been evident to those with eyes to see for decades.
But nobody seemed interested, even when the wheels started to come off as the airport closures got more frequent, the only thing many people were interested in was slagging off the airport firemen.
Well now we have it from independent Tribunal of Inquiry when it comes to determining its workers pay the States have failed them.
The ball is now in the States court to see if it can now come up with a fair and flexible system that Dave Jones can add to his list of the Islands achievements.
Report abuse
Survey results of CM’s intervention from the week that was
http://www.ifcfeed.com/articles/detail.aspx?articleid=1823
Report abuse
Neil Inder
Thats a pretty conclusive result!
I guess one of the issues thats troubles people is how come he waited until the airport was shut to interviene? And as CM should he not have been up to speed on the failing negotiations in the first place?
I think LT did the right thing in the end, but it should never have come to that, and so for me he gets credit for interviening but loses credit cuz he should have acted sooner.
Dave Jones
“That is of course if I stand at all, I was hoping some of you might stand and come and show us how easy it is to govern Guernsey”.
Seriously Dave are you saying you might not stand?
Report abuse
Hi Simon
Not sure what you mean by conclusive. Bear in mind the survey was conducted in the heat of the week. If you look at the “strength of sympathy” responses neither PSRC nor the Firefighters appear to have distinguished themselves.
As for the CM, according to the results he had support for his intervention. However over the 24 hour period that the survey was live, no one was aware that he had walked in with a cheque book.
I’m not getting into the debate, just presenting the survey, the time line and the circumstances.
Hope that helps.
Report abuse
Neil Inder
Thanks for your additional comments, I guess as the issue unfolded opinion moved around a fair bit.
Overall I dont think any party came out of this well.
Report abuse
We need to to bring back the likes of Mike Torode ,all these new ones seem to spend all their time playing twister
Report abuse
Interesting from the historical point of view I suppose looking back at the week the dispute finaly came to a head.
But as the independent Tribunal of Inquiry has given its judgement on the dispute who thought what then seems rather irrelevant now.
Report abuse
Roy Gueno
You must be kidding – the States of yesteryear was hardly better than the current lot. Overspends on a massive scale, politicians supplying stone for marinas, meat to the hospital, furniture to schools etc etc, I think you’re looking through rose tinted glasses!!
Report abuse
Phil
You are so right, I was gona write to say the same but i didnt think that GP would print it.
On the whole I think we are way better off than at certain times not too long gone….. I think our current crop are far more worthy, unfortunately they are also a tad less capable!
Report abuse
Simon
As odd as it may seem many of us do have lives other than the States of Guernsey. When you become a Deputy you give up your privacy and you become very public property indeed, simply because you are there to serve the public for the four years and the public want your attention. Now I am not complaining about that, as it goes with the job and we do live in a very small community where people hold strong views. However it is a very strange world to live in especially if you are high profile and have departmental responsibilities, you cannot walk across the Bridge or go into a pub or a supermarket, or as the other day the dry cleaners without being tackled by someone who wants to give you their view on an issue or sometimes it is just to complain about the States in general. I will have done this job for 12 years at the end of this term, 8 of those years will have been as a Minister. I am 60 years old and not as fit as I once was so there is that to consider, there is also our wives and partners to consider, my wife Bonny who has answered the phone (sometimes in the early hours of the morning) and our front door for all these years when people have called with their problems lives my life as well. She has listened patiently and with compassion when people have called with housing problems or some other problems that affect their lives so she is often in the front line when I am not at home. Our partners too take the often unfair criticism of there husband or partner very personally as they of course have feelings as well. Then there are our children, mine are both grown with jobs and partners of their own but they too get criticism of the States or their parent relayed to them on occasion. My daughter for instance was in a meeting once when a visiting manager was complaining about our Housing control laws and the Housing department strict rules on licences, My name was mentioned and in the end she had to tell a very embarrassed Manager that it was her father he was talking about and as he clearly did not understand the HCL he might want to leave it there. Then there is the personal damage we have suffered as a family to personal property (our cars mostly) during the tenancy review policy a couple of years ago we suffered quite badly from deliberate targeting of our vehicles most of it done in the early hours of the morning. So you see Simon it is not something that you continue with lightly, if you are successfully re-elected then you know from that moment that you have given up your private life for another four years. We will see if enough people want me to continue then I might but make no mistake you never really get used to be constantly kicked and you can only do this job if you have real passion for politics this island and its people
Report abuse
Dave – you not thinking of standing? Have to admit if you are not prepared to stand with a commitment to reduce the number of deputies I am afraid I would not vote for you anyway.
What kind of people do you think you need in the states now?
My wishlist of talents and capabilities for states members would include:
a reasonable level of intelligence and ability to think critically;
a tendency to only speak when they have something worthwhile to say;
ability to rise above petty personality politics and not to constantly carp on and attack other deputies due to personal petty agendas;
no over-inflated opinions of themselves in terms of their abilities and status;
demonstrated focusing their efforts on putting forward solutions rather than constantly criticising their colleagues.
taking difficult decisions not simply popularist ones to get re-elected.
willingness to accept collective responsibility and demonstrate good corporate governance.
Is this too much to ask – I was tempted to list in brackets deputies that completely fail with these attributes to illustrate my point but decided against it.
Where is the new blood going to come from? Mr Roffey has started the longest electoral campaign in history and is being paid by the Press to campaign! – so he is back next time. Mat is probably at the start of the longest political career in guernsey as incumbents so rarely fail to get elected and his only experience in life will be as a states member. Although well intentioned, intelligent and very eloquent and persausive, Mat you dont have real life experience with respect! Where are the the new candidates with real experience that the states and the people of guernsey really need going to come from?
Report abuse
jack (obite)
I would not stand on a manifesto that reduced our States member numbers to the level of an elected dictatorship or executive government by default which is what it would amount to so if I did decide to seek re-election I would have to forgo you vote. I would also suggest with respect, that it is not for you to decide the intellect, talents or capabilities of States members,it shows a degree of arrogance, that’s what happens in Sark at election time when lists are compiled and people are told who to vote for or loose their job. In a democracy it is for the voting public to choose who they wish to represent them and they must determine from meetings, manifestos and personal conversations with candidates as to whether they are competent to represent their views or not. Our States is made up of a cross section of our community and it is that community who must choose who those people are. Wherever human beings are, you will have personalities and in a consensus system such as ours you will always get strong differences of opinions and as we are all elected on our own manifestos you will of course always get personal agendas. There is no party doctrine, so therefore deputies are bound to put forward their pet policies or personal agendas. I can tell you this our parliament and its members are much better behaved than most, even Jersey for that matter and I can tell you there was far more personality politics in the past when I first joined the States than there is presently, in fact one of the charges laid against this particular States by the public is just how bland and lackluster many of our deputies appear to be. As for where is the new blood coming from I really cant answer that, we had quite a lot of ”new blood” at the last election only 2 years ago and it will be for others to gauge whether they have been effective deputies or not. I would not be at all surprised to see Mr. Roffey stand in 2 years time bur that will be a matter for him. I am going to stand up for Deputy Fallaize, he may be young in years but he has passion and commitment two vital ingredients if you want to do this job properly. He also has the ability to listen to several aspects of an argument and make up his OWN mind and not behave like a sheep just following everyone else. He also has one other quality that is sorely needed in our assembly and that is the ability to debate, that may sound odd but believe me it is very difficult on occasions’ to get any kind of debate going.
Report abuse
Hello Dave – thanks for your comprehensive response. Where to start?
One – I think you will find I was full of praise for Matt – complementing his debating skills! I agree fully with you there!
Some very emotive language in your post – who said fewer deputies would mean an elected dictatorship? I dont see why we cant have a better calibre of states with fewer deputies.
Quite amused by your statement that “I would also suggest with respect, that it is not for you to decide the intellect, talents or capabilities of States members,it shows a degree of arrogance,” – for the avoidance of doubt I didnt compile a list telling anyone who to vote for – I was going to compile a list of those deputies who did not meet the criteria I was suggesting. Plus I am in no doubt that these are my own opinions which I thought I was allowed as part of the electorate – surely I am allowed freedom of speech (sounds a bit like a totalitarian dictatorship if I am not allowed a view!)- you might not like my views (and call me arrogant – at least you did not call me a bigot!) in the same way that i dont like the views and actions of our motley bunch of deputies (case in point – hasnt Dudley Owen got anything better to worry about than litter on l’Eree). The point about democracy and the electorate choosing deputies – the problem is that our system is rubbish – in one electoral district there were 11 candidates for eight seats?! You have got better odds of winning than just tossing a coin. If there was one decent candidate I could vote for – I am still going to get lumbered with seven people who dont represent me and who I would be embarrassed to represent me – but I cant do anything about it – I am still going to get eight representatives – the system is mad and due to vested interests (incumbents have huge advantage in GUernsey elections) you lot will not change the system. and finally I am not alone, there is a huge silent minority on our shores, who arent the usual 40 odd people who phone in on the BBC Sunday morning programme, who are literally sick and tired of this states – I’ve endured 9 states in my lifetime and I am afriad the current house is the worst we have ever had and this is the first time I have said that!
Report abuse
jack (obite)
I spent a number of years not voting, as a protest to no Island wide voting… It has got me nowhere and as a single issue protest was futile. I suspect you might be in danger of doing the same regarding the number of deputies?
Report abuse
Simon – there is a large silent majority clamouring for change and a states we can be proud of. they aint listening so the electorate can start by changing the deputies – that means a better calibre of potential deputy standing in 2012 (sorry Dave, if that makes me arrogant, I just dont rate you and the majority of your colleagues!) – we have to stand for change! I have yet to hear any convincing argument as to why we need 47 deputies in the states! Island wide voting for 45 deputies is a nonsense – you could have island wide voting if there were fewer positions.
Report abuse
Jack,
I have some questions for you :-
What evidence would you deploy to support your assertion that “…there is a large silent majority clamouring for change…”?
Where do you stand on party politics in Guernsey?
How would you seek to improve the calibre of those offering themselves for election?
The editor of the Press seems fixated with his wish to substitute a more executive system of government for our current consensus model. What say you?
Report abuse
jack
I agree that many people want change, Im not so convinced the silent majority want the same changes as you do!
I admit that under the current system, but with fewer deputies, the likes of BF and LT would not have got in (not a bad thing in my view)but with IWV I dont think they would have made it either!
Personally I think Island wide voting is a must I think the whole Island should have their say about a particular individual representative, who afterall impacts on all of us. I also think that any states members should know they carry an island wide mandate after all almost every issue is Island wide.
As for caliber of people standing, how would that be improved by reducing the number of deputies?
Report abuse
Jack (o’byte)
It has more to do with numbers than caliber which of course is important. It is about having enough opposition on the floor of the House to curtail if necessary the more extreme views or policies of a block vote of Ministers and deputy Ministers. I also repeat what I posted previously; it is for the people of Guernsey to decide on who represents them in the States. If they get it wrong it is within their gift to put it right by removing those who they believe have let them down, or indeed remove the whole states and replace it with people of their choice. Although I would agree that I.W.V would be a more democratic process in that regard. Nobody said that you were not entitled to a view but it is only the electorate that can decides who governs them. You may not rate any of us, that is your opinion one way you could ensure change is to stand for the States yourself. You are right I think there is a majority who want island wide voting and when it comes to the States I will support it whole heartedly.
Below is an extract from an article I wrote on I W V nearly ten years ago.
“One problem we have, is that our people do not believe anymore that they can influence the States of Deliberation, they certainly don’t believe it at election time which is why I believe they are turning their backs on the whole electoral process. They simply don’t feel that they have any say or influence over the majority of politicians that are elected to govern them.
It would be hard to argue that the parish or electoral district system we have at present in terms of political justice for our electorate, does not represent a significant denial of genuine democracy to our people. I repeat again, the elector in Guernsey does not help elect a member to serve in the parliament of a party based administration, as would be the case in many countries, he helps elect an entire government, including a built in opposition. And it is for this reason, that it is essential that the electorate should have the opportunity of electing all of the members of the house.
Just touching on the accountability issue again, the present system also leaves members of the House free to inflict any unwelcome or unsympathetic policies of planning, traffic, the closure of schools, even the sighting of refuse tips for the disposal of rubbish or incinerators in any parish or district that is not their own. Fully aware that the views of the residents of that electoral district will be of little consequence, as their vote cannot damage the electoral chances of the people who made that decision outside the district in question. Given that position, is it any wonder that people who are forced by the present system to vote on Parish or electoral district lines, desert the ballot box when the views of the Parish are constantly ignored by States Members the voter had no hand in electing?
As for the question of choice, the voter has very little real choice of candidates on polling day, those who do bother to turn out to vote, (if exit interviews are to be believed) usually end up voting for the candidates they either dislike least, rather than selecting those across the island that they believe will best represent their views. Finding themselves in this situation the only other option open to those disaffected voters, unable to find a suitable candidate in their voting area, is to spoil their paper, or not to vote at all. An option it would seem, more and more people are adopting.
This kind of voter apathy can often lead to people no longer wishing to register on the electoral roll and in many cases, never returning to vote again. Voter apathy is corrosive and can be passed down through generations, entire families never voting in their entire life. It is just as important, for the electorate of the island to be able to remove politicians from office, as it is to put them there in the first place. Under the present system that is simply not possible, as they can only vote to remove a maximum of 6 members of the house at anyone time from a very restricted voting area”.
As for the question of choice, the voter has very little real choice of candidates on polling day, those who do bother to turn out to vote, (if exit interviews are to be believed) usually end up voting for the candidates they either dislike least, rather than selecting those across the island that they believe will best represent their views. Finding themselves in this situation the only other option open to those disaffected voters, unable to find a suitable candidate in their voting area, is to spoil their paper, or not to vote at all. An option it would seem, more and more people are adopting. This is not true democracy, it is more akin to a lottery.
Report abuse
Dave Jones
Your comment that “It is about having enough opposition on the floor of the House to curtail if necessary the more extreme views or policies of a block vote of Ministers and deputy Ministers” is an interesting one.
1) If we elect the best candidates in the first place, with fewer deputies, better-paid deputies and island-wide voting, then we are likely, in my view, to get a better calibre of decision-making, which avoids the need for the safety net of being able to outvote them.
2) One could equally argue for the need to have enough additional members in the House to outvote those who cause the decision-making paralysis in the first place!
Surely we should be aspiring to have a competent Government, properly elected on an island-wide basis, and backing them to get on with it without being held back by the ditherers and waiverers who have no confidence in their own decisions. If we have a smaller number of deputies, perhaps with a set number (say 6 out of a reduced 24) having to stand in staggered island-wide elections each year, then the process of electing the 6 each year should be one which will be taken very seriously by all islanders with a view to getting the best elected representatives possible.
Report abuse
David
There is no guarantee whatsoever that you will get the best calibre of candidates by reducing the numbers, even with IWV and having different people would not address block voting which would be effectively executive government by default. History has proved my point for me, we have had in the past assemblies made up of the great and the good of Guernsey society, with top advocates and leading business people occupying those seats. In fact I would say the majority of members in those days were either running their businesses or retired business people, they were in fact the only people who could afford to stand for the States as everyone else needed a full time job to make ends meet, there were exceptions I know but very few. The starting time of the States actually reflects that and was set at 9.30 to give States members a chance to attend to their businesses before the meeting commenced. Many of these high calibre people were around when I entered the States and I can tell you all was far from well. They were for instance, presiding over the worst social housing crisis the Island can remember, major States projects out of control, many of them overspent by millions. Crumbling schools and hospitals after years of neglect and under investment, while at the same time millions were found to lavish on marinas and other shiny baubles much less important to the community. So please don’t tell me that the calibre of people necessarily makes for good government or decent decision making. You only have to look across the water for that, the UK government is made up of some really high calibre people and yet it is clear to most of the British public that they couldn’t run a chip shop. I think I know where I would rather live and under which system of government I prefer. Many of the decisions made are made by ordinary islanders elected to the States by ordinary people and that is as it has been for many decades. Most of these are the right decisions, whether it is protecting our economy and Zero 10 or looking after our fuel supplies, transport links and the rebuilding of our infrastructure. I also don’t think you appreciate at times the huge pressures today’s States members are under, apart from the domestic demands on the States, there is the external pressures as many envious of our position try to disrupt or ruin our economy. You also talk as if every decision taken in the States is paralised by indecision and is instantly reversed once made or the government is just incompetent, this simply is not the reality of the situation 95% of what comes to the States through the Billets is debated and passed as sensible well structured policy for this island. Finally David on your last point I do believe in island wide voting and as I have said on numerous occasions I will support it when it comes to the States. I get the feeling you would be prepared to have any government so long as you could pick the people who would run it, that as I say is the job of the people of Guernsey and if you know of anybody eligible to stand at the next election who you would have more faith in, then get them up there at the hustings and give the people the choice.
Report abuse
Dave Jones
Merely my opinion, but you won’t convince me that the quality of governance of this island has improved over the past decade. I fully accept that the role of deputy or minister has become considerably more complicated in that time, and is certainly under much more scrutiny from the media, including blogs such as these. As a result, we know more about our deputies and ministers and their activities and decisions, far more so than in days gone by.
But because its become more complicated and higher profile, it does need a certain calibre of person to stand. A certain level of commercial background and “nous” is required so that deputies and ministers can stand up to their department’s civil servants, instead of bowing to their so-called “better judgement”. And it doesn’t need to be just “businessmen” – its very healthy to have ex-teachers and ex-doctors in the House, although in some individual cases less so.
I know of around 15 individuals who 10 years ago might have been willing to stand for election, but who have no interest under the present system, especially after witnessing Stuart Falla’s well-publicised experiences. I appreciate that from the inside looking out its a different view from the outside looking in, but rest assured that it’s not an attractive proposition especially for businessment who are used to making decisions and getting things done, without the charade of having listen to 47 people get up and say something for the sake of it, whether its worth saying or not, and without members being capable of making the right decisions in the first place. Its the lack of ability to make decisions which is the problem. You will argue till you are blue in the face about the current system of government being better than executive government, and I in turn will argue till I’m blue in the face that it cannot be anything worse than what we’ve got at the moment, a half-baked and half-committed adaptation of the Harwood recommendations.
I would naturally expect you to defend the status quo, and I’m pleased that you favour island-wide voting, but I think if you listened to the public of Guernsey the overwhelming perception is that the current system is knalckered and unfit for purpose. Its possible for argue against executive government, but its impossible to argue in favour of the status quo. However, the status quo with far fewer deputies and island-wide voting is a different matter. I’m not advocating 12 deputies making all the decisions, but 24 is far more realistic than 47. I think you would see more people coming forward to stand, and that alone would make a difference.
I know that you won’t agree with that, but you have your opinion and I have mine.
Report abuse
Hello boyos! (so many celtic brothers here -it feels like westminster!)
So many questions – so here are some answers:
First up Sean:
“What evidence would you deploy to support your assertion that “…there is a large silent majority clamouring for change…”?”
Ok – fair point, based on my limited experience down the pub, on the street, dinner parties – in the circles I move in there is exasperation at the petty minded, stupid behaviour of the states. So you can qualify my view – but please the phone in is not representative of the people – it is a small clique of individuals who ring in week in week out – sorry that makes me arrogant I guess Dave?
Where do you stand on party politics in Guernsey?
Good point – two observations. 1) I am in Mr Roper’s camp here – if you had not already noticed we already have party politics in Guernsey. unfortunately we have 47 political parties. Recipe for disaster as countless independent bodies have pointed out e.g. WAO, Tribunal of Inquiry – but what do they know heh? 2) we dont have consensus politics we have majoiry voting (by a poor quality of deputy, soz simply my view).
How would you seek to improve the calibre of those offering themselves for election? (also a question raised by Simon)
Raise the bar – make it harder to get elected, simply basic economics, reduce the no of seats available. Why did Mr Falla walk away? Why did Mr Parkinson throw the towel in less than two years into this term? the 24-21 vote last week was unbelievable – which bit did the 21 not get?
The editor of the Press seems fixated with his wish to substitute a more executive system of government for our current consensus model. What say you?
All I want is something that works – perhaps this system can work if you change the people? the latest about PSD vote of no confidence is another classic example of the states members acting crassly and being up themselves!
Dave – couldnt find a question to answer in your posts, as I say to my husband – nevermind the quantity, its the quality that counts! But in passing, tempted to stand next time and also tempted to change my name by deed poll to “Not-Dave-Jones-Thank-God” Would be fun on the stump and if elected issuing media statements on a daily basis and having the bailiff call me for a states debate with the immortal lines “Deputy Not Dave Jones Thank God”!
David – (not Dave Jones, surreal huh – hours of entertainment possible here) – agree with much of what you say!
Toodle pip!
Report abuse
Jack (Surely Another member?)
An assured series of responses : your platform has so much of the inside perspective one usually associates with one of the 47 political parties you identify in your most recent offering.
Two further questions :-
1)How would you seek to foster the quality of leadership that you seem to suggest is currently lacking in the States?
2)How would you insert a balance to counter poor quality leadership in a smaller States? As I recall, Advocate Harwood placed a premium upon high quality leadership and “collective responsibility” within a Policy Council or cabinet. Dave Jones has set out some of the problems with reducing the number of elected representatives… especially if Guernsey were to adopt a more executive system.
Finally, the 24 -21 vote can be explained, in relation to my vote at least, by concerns that one of the first steps towards a more authoritarian political system is nearly always to narrow the terms of debate. Of course, this may not have been the intention of Deputies Trott and Parkinson… perhaps I’ve just studied too much political history!
Report abuse
Sean – your other questions:
1)How would you seek to foster the quality of leadership that you seem to suggest is currently lacking in the States?
the deputies would have to acknowledge the need for collective responsibility and good corporate governance. Many of the deputies appear to play lip service to these ideas. the PSD coverage in the press – a case in point. You have some people, who outside of the states would be unemployable (excluding your good self) who are frustrated and looking for a job. Part of Guernsey politics of the new millenium seems to be the mid term hari kiri with no confidence votes – already had a go at PAC, now PSD, who is next? so comes back to calibre of deputies.
2)How would you insert a balance to counter poor quality leadership in a smaller States? As I recall, Advocate Harwood placed a premium upon high quality leadership and “collective responsibility” within a Policy Council or cabinet. Dave Jones has set out some of the problems with reducing the number of elected representatives… especially if Guernsey were to adopt a more executive system.
I dont accept any of Jones perceived problems – these are excuses to prevent change and protect the status quo. Shrink the number of deputies, shrink the number of departments?
Finally, the 24 -21 vote can be explained, in relation to my vote at least, by concerns that one of the first steps towards a more authoritarian political system is nearly always to narrow the terms of debate. Of course, this may not have been the intention of Deputies Trott and Parkinson… perhaps I’ve just studied too much political history!
But Sean why bother agreeing the government business plan if you are going to ignore it and make changes on a whim with policy made up on the hoof a few days before a meeting. If you have a proposal should not you have to consider the financial implications – how on earth can the 47 deputies have a debate without this information – i dont see it as narrowing a debate – isnt it making a more informed debate?
Thanks for having a dialogue on here Sean -where have the others gone?
Report abuse
Jack
Spruce’s manifesto indicated that he was of the right calibre
That’s turned belly up,so however many deputies there are you place your X and takes your chances
Report abuse
jack
in answer to your question 1) above; HSSD mate!
Report abuse
Jack
Before the British election coverage draws this sad political anorak to the TV screen let me respond to your very valid query re.the apparent contradiction of seeming to support the SSP process and then appearing (to some)to undermine the logic of that process by accepting the possibility of considering requetes, etc. “on a whim” or “on the hoof”.
Of course, and perhaps unsurprisingly, I would resist the notion that whims correctly describe every consideration submitted in requete form. However, should any poorly pondered requete find its way onto the States’ agenda, it would doubtless be thrown out by the sensible majority. Indeed, it may well be challenged prior to debate to test the appetite of the States for having its time expended on a mere whim.
Jack, you may wish to challenge this notion of quality control in the States and I accept that some less disciplined Deputies may try it on from time to time. Personally, that is a price I am prepared to pay in order to maintain free debate.
I will conclude by confirming that I am generally in favour of those positing any new scheme accepting some responsibility for affording their colleagues some indication of the funding source. In short, I favour responsible democratic participation.
Report abuse
Simon – spot on!
Ray – I had two candidates last time that I could actually support – I was powerless to stop the village idiots from getting elected – all I am saying is give me a meaningful choice and make my vote count.
latest spectacle on waste would laughable if it wasnt so important. Dont they realise how childish and pathetic they look in the real world – it is almost as if they are living in a parallel universe. Cos it certainly aint the one I am living in.
its gone quiet again – where have they gone?
Report abuse