Efforts to ensure work at the PEH is funded, whatever else is decided this week, have worked meaning that unless the States vote to do nothing at all about our taxes and spending, then the next phase of modernisation work at the hospital should go ahead.
Deputy Al Brouard, supported by Deputy Tina Bury, lodged the amendment against the official plans for funding and investment to put the approval for the second phase of the hospital modernisation plan into each scenario.
Previously the hospital work wasn't included in the package dubbed the 'do minimum' scenario. Now it will be included meaning that the States could vote to progress Phase 2 of the modernisation plan even if the main revenue raisers of GST and borrowing hundreds of millions of pounds are rejected.
Deputy Brouard gave emotive speeches backing up his plans for the hospital at the outset and close of this stage of the debate.
"...you're going to need to increase the facilities at the hospital at some stage," he explained.
"It is not going to be any cheaper tomorrow than it is today. So you can kick that can down the road and make it more difficult for the next set of states members to deal with or you can actually do something about it today.
"We know we've got the demographics that are coming against us. We are actually feeling that pressure now already. So the choice will be yours. You can do something in this term or you can leave it as a fudge for someone else to pick up."
Pictured: Deputy Al Brouard has successfully championed the continued modernisation of the Princess Elizabeth Hospital.
"We will continue whatever you do, we will continue to try and make the hospital work as best as we can," continued Deputy Brouard.
"But it won't be satisfactory. It won't cover all the risks that we run daily. It won't cover the fact that we will then lose hospital staff because they now know that we won't be having the new extension which they'll be so much looking forward to. We will also not be able to attract doctors as much as we we could have done by having a modern facility where they want to work. And if we want to attract the best we'd need to have facilities that also reflect their careers and their aspirations. So it's entirely in your hands, deputies."
Deputy Brouard acknowledged the other facets of the debate where colleagues espoused the money being spent on health while locals are struggling to afford homes, that there aren't enough new properties being built and public services, like keeping the island clean and tidy, appear to be being cut.
However, he did also acknowledge that regardless of the many other challenges the island faces, the modernisation of the hospital is crucial because without it we will run too many risks.
"The plans will not be perfect," he said, "they will be out of date in 20 years time, but it will give us a good 20, 30, 40 years of use of that site. And also it will enable for us on island because we can't always rely on other countries to provide our services for us.
"We need a safe place to stabilise people before we go to other countries. So we need to have a hospital on here that is fit for purpose and that can deliver 21st century care.
"That's the basically the gist of the of the amendment. It is a cascade amendment, but it will allow you that in all options, whether that's high GST, high borrowing, low borrowing, no GST, whatever it is, it will give you the option at the end to ensure that the hospital non modernisation programme continues if you want it."
Pictured: Phase One of the work at the hospital is almost complete, with Phase Two designed to follow on seamlessly.
By adding the hospital development plans to the 'do minimum' proposals, HSC is running the risk of the funding being declined if the States votes to do nothing and shelves the capital projects list and the plans for borrowing and taxation. However, Deputy Brouard is confident this option will mean the States are more likely to decide to do the least even if they don't like any of the other options.
Deputy Mark Helyar voted against this amendment saying it may lessen the options for those deputies wanting to stop high spending meaning they'll be more likely to reject everything.
"We've heard a lot of talk about the fear of getting to the end of this debate with no results, but members just agreeing to the core will be a result," he said.
"That includes £35million of extra funding through savings through corporate taxation and motoring taxation. That will be a result, even if we just do that. So hopefully, we will not leave this room without a result."
Fellow P&R member, Deputy Bob Murray, also voted against the amendment.
"We want an extension to a hospital quite rightly. We need to invest in our education system quite rightly. We need to invest in our technology quite rightly. We've definitely got to invest in housing quite rightly. And here we are fighting like cats in a sack over who gets a slice of the pie," he said.
Pictured: This week's States debate centres around the Policy and Resources Committee's plans for States spending and taxation.
Deputy Sasha Kazantseva-Miller was one of the 20 deputies who backed the amendment. She said putting the hospital project into each scenario showed faith in the modernisation plan.
"...what we will effectively be doing is saying we think the hospital overall given everything is really important among all capital portfolios. So we're giving it more chance.
"We're effectively saying when we come out from these debates we would have given the hospital three chances to be selected. I would like a lot of capital projects to go ahead, but I think in the big scheme of things, it's probably relevant to elevate the chances of the hospital to succeed this week. So on this basis, I think it's a worthwhile amendment to consider because it just gives us that big chance.
"I think it sends a message to the community that we really want the hospital."
Deputies voted 20 pour Amendment 6 and 19 contre with one abstention. The voting record can be viewed HERE.
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.