ONE of the less remarked on decisions of the States last week was the 24-21 vote to restrict the freedom with which members can propose changes to the island’s strategic plan.

For most islanders, asking deputies to explain how any significant change to Guernsey’s ‘business plan’ would be funded is simply a matter of common sense. Why would anyone want to amend the strategic roadmap without the financial implications being understood?

Yet in the topsy-turvy world of Guernsey government, that is exactly what happens. Any one of the 47 members can argue for change to a document that has been months in preparation and a result of cross-department coordination, irrespective of the consequences.

More particularly, the deputy lobbying for change does not have to say what service cut, what redundancies or what tax rise will be needed to fund his or her pet idea. That falls to someone else. So all the power to influence comes without any responsibility for the outcome.

That is an obvious weakness in the system — yet nearly half the Assembly voted against repairing that deficiency.

More worrying for taxpayers, the expectation was that the improvement, moved by the Policy Council, would fail. It was only the subsequent disclosures about Health and Social Services’ cavalier attitude to public funds and the subsequent exchanges about trust that saw it scrape through — even though four ministers voted against their own council’s motion.

It was a vivid illustration of the words of the airport tribunal’s findings a few days earlier that Guernsey’s system of government ‘does not encourage either a corporate approach or collective responsibility’.

It is difficult to overemphasise the importance of this. A significant number of deputies believe it is more important for them to have the freedom to disrupt than it is to support policies approved by a majority: Environment’s refusal to accept the Assembly’s direction over paid parking remains a classic example.

The taxpayer, of course, is the victim because it guarantees bad governance, an absence of value for money and no accountability – all points made, yet again, by the latest independent report, this time from the tribunal of inquiry.

Depressingly, deputies simply won’t listen to an inconvenient truth.