Does the Machinery of Government need changing again?

Wednesday 20 March 2019

Another discussion has been held over whether Guernsey's current machinery of government is suitable for the island, this time at the IoD's mid term breakfast.

Deputies Gavin St Pier and Matt Fallaize were joined by Stretch Kontelj and Advocate Peter Harwood to discuss what it was that led to the States being set up the way it is, and whether that should change.

Compered by Advocate Elaine Gray, yesterday's discussion covered a number of areas including the Harwood review panel, which put forward a series of recommendations that the States used to build its current system, the possibility of Executive Government, and also how much time should be spent on strategic planning versus action. 

But the discussion really centred on whether the current States of Guernsey is better than it used to be. 

The 100 strong IoD audience at the event were supportive of changing it again, backing the idea of Executive Government, but Deputy St Pier pointed to the UK right now and the Brexit situation, asking whether people thought it was all that it was made out to be.

"We shouldn't always imagine that there are better systems out there. Systems of government are all about compromise, but actually something that we do better than elsewhere is stability," he said.

"We shouldn't underestimate that value and diminish ourselves by imagining that there is always a better solution." 

The IoD midterm meeting took place at St James yesterday.

Advocate Gray put pressure on the panel saying the States this term had spent too much time putting together its strategic plan, which was a core part of the change. One of the main criticisms the Harwood Panel generated was that there was no driver of policy on that strategic level, so in this assembly the Policy & Resources Committee was created to do just that.

But Advocate Gray said P&R has spent more than a year putting together its priorities for the States. Surely it would be preferable to spend less time planning and more time doing, she asked. Dr Kontelj drew the comparison to a business and said they would not spend this length of time coming up with a strategic direction to follow. Both Deputies agreed any future planning should take less time, but Deputy Fallaize also said the surface 'inactivity' of this assembly was not necessarily indicative of nothing being done.

"I think the States of Deliberation this term has been as inactive as any assembly in the past, but I think that is because a lot of the work that was previously one at the States level is now being carried out at the committee level," he said. This was all part of the new system of government that he had helped to create in his time as the President of the States Assembly and Constitution Committee.

He also deflected comparisons of the island to Jersey by highlighting a key difference in the two States' overall spending policy.

"I don't think differences in performance in Guernsey and Jersey have very much to do with the government, its more to do with public expenditure. [Their] solution to most problems its to throw money at them, which is the very opposite of what we tend to do in Guernsey," he said.

"If you spend a lot of money you can give the impression of action." 

Overall, it was agreed the process of putting together the P&R plan for this term took a long time, but as Deputy St Pier rightly pointed out, the amendment to extend the States terms to five years in an attempt to tackle this problem was defeated. 

"The P&R plan is the government's manifesto. In a system where you are not electing parties, that work has to happen after an election," he said.

Concluding the event, IoD Chairman John Clacy said they wanted to make the system of government an election issue, because they felt it was something that really needed to be discussed. 

Pictured top L-R: Dr Kontelj, Advocate Harwood, Deputy Fallaize and Deputy St Pier.