MANY islanders are rightly angered that the States of Guernsey put museum storage above human lives when they rejected proposals for spending a comparatively small amount of money on a bowel cancer screening programme.

For most, there simply isn’t any argument about what should take priority – early detection and treatment of this form of cancer is proven not only to save lives but also, on one estimate, to save more in hospital care than the screening programme itself.

However, the Assembly was not faced with an either-or decision. All departments, including Health and Social Services, identified their own priorities and had them subjected to a subsequent external forensic review process – which members approved – and museum storage was a project that was regarded as essential.

And while deputies are being roundly criticised by islanders for rejecting screening, it was actually the right decision in the circumstances.

One of the six principles of good governance, as identified by the UK’s Independent Commission on Good Governance in Public Services, is taking informed, transparent decisions and managing risk.

Deputies were being asked to reach conclusions on the basis of a proper, researched and fully costed prioritisation process that excluded cancer screening because HSSD, as the expert department, did not put it forward.

That States members chose not to be deflected from doing things properly might be regarded as a sign of growing awareness of corporate working and something to be applauded.

That said, it is also clear that developments in the field of bowel cancer screening have advanced and that this is something an island that prides itself on the quality and compassion of its health service must have.

The States departments and committees this year will spend more than £347m. while the £200,000 needed for screening is just 0.05% of that huge total, effectively just £22,000 each from the service departments.

While an attempted hijack of the strategic planning process was the wrong way of funding screening, it was a valuable way of highlighting the issue.

And if the other departments won’t find £22,000 each to pay for it, HSSD could simply lose six of its 87 HR staff instead.