Select a region
The suggestion of employing six additional civil servants has come in for heavy criticism from the group of deputies hoping to set up a dedicated housing committee - they've labelled the idea “out of proportion”, “an act of desperation”, and showing a failure to properly prioritise policies.
Environment & Infrastructure want States support for an additional £400,000 per year to hire six extra officers to help deliver on its housing policies instead of setting up a new committee which would absorb the housing mandates currently spread between it, Policy & Resources, and Employment & Social Security.
The committee said setting up a new department would slow down progress, add complexity, and would cost more to run.
But the suggestion has come under fire from the group backing a new committee, who have accused E&I of taking its eye off the housing ball this term.
“Since the publication of the Requête, we have been repeatedly told by Environment & Infrastructure that a significant amount of work was already underway to ease the housing crisis. In fact, the amendment published this week asks us to note that ‘over the coming months’ reports on ten priority areas will be published”, said Deputy Sasha Kazantseva-Miller, who is leading the argument.
“The proposals to hire six additional senior policy officers raises question marks over what is actually going to be delivered and when... I am increasingly concerned about where we are finding ourselves so late in the day. The latest yo-yo position on resourcing appears to be an act of desperation.”
Deputy Peter Ferbrache, the former Policy & Resources President, said he could not recall another time when a committee had requested six new staff in one go.
“While I support the need to appropriately resource and invest into the delivery of States priorities, these latest proposals from E&I are out of proportion and out of touch with reality, especially against the backdrop of States finances,” he added.
And Deputy David Mahoney said the request represented “an admission that housing, an area of prime States priority from the beginning of this term, has been undervalued”, and it should have been made last year when funding was being allocated for the rest of the political term.
“A request of this nature also signals a lack of prioritisation, which is of significant concern given the States’ record in trying to do too much and not delivering.”
Pictured: The States are back in session this week.
Environment & Infrastructure said the money intended to set up and run the new housing committee would be better spent on additional staff within existing teams, saying doing otherwise would cost at least £110,000 more as senior officers would need to be appointed and salaries for deputies within it would increase.
The requérants are seeking £155,000 per year from next year’s budget, as well as the cash for housing budgets in other committees, to run the new department - but P&R has also cast doubt on whether costs would be that low.
Its supporters say it would speed up housebuilding and provide more transparency and accountability.
Environment & Infrastructure, as well as Employment & Social Security and the Development & Planning Authority, have said this is naive.
“The Committee does not consider the creation of a new political body will accelerate progress and delivery of housing, nor that a Committee for Housing will achieve this in a more streamlined way than through the current political structure. An additional committee would in fact introduce further complexity,” E&I said.
“Neither the Committee nor officers are aware of any examples of work being slowed down by the current political arrangements. There has never been a delay arising from a constraint around a committee agenda: such bottlenecks that have arisen have been in terms of officer resource.”
ESS said responsibility for social housing should be tied up with its responsibilities for social support, but said communication on policy progress and which department is responsible for what could be improved.
The DPA similarly said a new committee would hamper coordination and criticised what it saw as a power grab over both housing and planning policies which would lead to “serious issues of conflict of interest”.
Debate was set to take place in the States this week, but its likely to be postponed until December after the signatories said they would back a delay proposed by P&R so that the 2025 budget can be considered first.
Pictured (top): Deputy Sasha Kazantseva-Miller.
Six new 'Housing Officers' wanted
Housing committee debate set to be pushed to December
P&R pours cold water on housing committee as argument hots up
Comments
Comments on this story express the views of the commentator only, not Bailiwick Publishing. We are unable to guarantee the accuracy of any of those comments.