Guernsey’s Health minister yesterday released a statement on the current row triggered by a majority of his political board members which threatens to derail proposals for extra care housing designed to make Maison Maritaine and Longue Rue House fit for purpose.

Unfortunately, it did little to shed any light on what has caused what amounts to a revolt by his board this late in the proceedings and nor did it indicate whether he shares his colleagues’ concerns.

Irrespective, the situation threatens the credibility of not just the policy making process but also the central coordinating role of the Policy Council itself.

Islanders would expect that after the months, and possibly years, that has gone into coming up with the extra care concept and the partnership involvement of HSSD, Housing and the Social Services Departments that when a Billet d’Etat report is published recommending a £30m. rebuild of the existing residential homes it is soundly based.

Because of the absence of clarity on exactly what has prompted the row, Treasury and Resources confirmation yesterday that it would stick by its original comments supporting the scheme appears as the best independent view on whether the Health rebels have a case or not.

In its letter in the Billet, T&R – not noted for being cavalier with taxpayers’ money – said that in an ideal world a complete package would be in place to cover strategic context and funding.

Critically, however, it went on: ‘…we are satisfied that there is an urgent and therefore overriding need to commence the planning and redevelopment of the extra care facilities at Maison Maritaine and  Longue Rue House ahead of the States debating the Older People’s Strategy’.

Policy Council, which included the heads of HSSD, Housing and Social Security, signed off on that. The need to put in place modern care facilities for older islanders was so overwhelming that the usual niceties had to be dispensed with.

So what exactly have the HSSD’s dissident four come up with that requires delaying an urgent project and that, seemingly, could not be resolved in committee?