Guernsey Press

We would have sorted Brexit conundrum – P&R president

GUERNSEY’S system of government is better equipped to deal with decisions such as Brexit while Jersey throws money at problems, business leaders heard yesterday.

Published
Policy & Resources president Gavin St Pier makes a point during yesterday’s Institute of Directors Guernsey branch mid-term event. The other members of the panel, left to right, are branch vice-chairman Dr Stretch Kontelj, former chief minister Peter Harwood and Deputy Matt Fallaize. (Picture by Adrian Miller, 24179216)

Addressing the Guernsey Institute of Directors’ mid-term review, Policy & Resources president Gavin St Pier said that stability was the bedrock of the island’s political structure and that it was a major strength.

‘Our government would have found an answer to the Brexit consensus conundrum. We would have gone through the process of all of those things that Westminster is completely unable to deliver,’ he said.

‘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.

‘We can claim to have stability, we shouldn’t underestimate that value and diminish ourselves by imagining that there is always a better solution,’ said Deputy St Pier, who also acknowledged that the island’s political system was capable of improvement.

He said that the current system was working effectively when he spoke as part of a panel discussion.

However, there were arguably too many priorities, although the committees were working on what they had been set.

With him on the panel were former chief minister Peter Harwood, who chaired the review into the machinery of government, Guernsey IoD vice-chairman Dr Stretch Kontelj and Education president Matt Fallaize, who played a major role in producing the current committee system.

Deputy Fallaize told the event at St James that the government was flexible to respond when there was a crisis.

He added that some things had gone better in the States, while others had worsened, although this would now be helped by putting strategic plans in place.

There was some comment on these strategic plans which have taken 12 to 18 months to complete, which Mr Kontelj said was not good enough.

Mr Harwood pointed out that similar strategic plans in Jersey had taken between six and seven months to complete, although both deputies on the panel hoped that any further plans would not take as long now the initial strategic work was complete.

However, Dr Kontelj added that it was not the strategy of the government that frustrated people, but the execution.

He used the time it took to make decisions on the runway as an example of this point, although Deputy St Pier argued that the UK government has been debating Heathrow Airport for around 30 years.

‘Their government is no better at solving these problems than ours,’ said Deputy St Pier.

Comparisons between Guernsey and Jersey were made while discussing how active the States of Guernsey had been.

Deputy Fallaize said one reason for the States appearing to be doing less was that a lot of issues that would usually have been discussed during States debates were now being dealt with at a committee level.

He went on to address activity in respect to Jersey.

‘I don’t think differences in performance in Guernsey and Jersey has very much to do with the system of government, it’s more to do with public expenditure.

‘Jersey’s solution to most problems in the public sector is to throw money at it, which is the very opposite of what we tend to do in Guernsey.

‘But if you spend a lot of money, you can give the impression of action and Jersey’s Council of Ministers are forever announcing new initiatives which essentially are based on spending lots of money on the problems their community has identified.’

The debate was moderated by Elaine Gray, a partner at Carey Olsen, who posed a series of questions to the panel followed by questions from those attending the event.