WHEN the States meet this week members will be asked to approve an amendment to the minimum wage proposals which will give deputies freedom to set the level where they see fit.

While at first glance it seems harmless, or even desirable, it is a dangerous path to tread.

The deputy leading it also has a second amendment which seeks to commit the Assembly to linking the minimum to average island earnings and pushing basic pay to 45% of that average by 2020.

Those supporting the amendments will argue that Commerce and Employment’s recommendations are to take it or leave it since the Assembly has to accept or reject.

Why not let the members of the Assembly propose what they like and let the States of the day resolve it in discussion?

Attractive though that might be, there is an inherent danger in the proposal, especially since the second amendment confirms that there is an element of social engineering in what is proposed.

If members believe the C&E minimum wage proposals are too low they should reject them and, unless the Commerce board wants to risk a vote of no confidence, it returns with more palatable recommendations.

But there is a retained element of control, of consultation with industry and an opportunity of reporting back with facts and figures.

Freeing the Assembly to set rates on a wave of emotion and hubris is a recipe for poor decision-making – and one that would be very hard to overturn.

As it stands, members have no idea why 45% of average earnings has been selected as a target, what effect its imposition will have on businesses or how that dovetails in with other social policy initiatives to help people on low incomes.

The other aspect that is unhelpful is the lack of confidence it suggests in C&E.

Its board was voted in by the States, it is staffed by professionals and it consults widely, yet some States members with an agenda in effect believe they can do a better job without the resources.

That’s hardly taking informed, transparent decisions or managing risk.