15 September 2010
A week, it is said, is a long time in politics. Speaking to you today in the middle of a debate on the Annual Business Plan I am coming to the view that a week is a VERY long time in politics.
Jersey’s Ministerial System will soon have been in existence for five years. Surely this is long enough to produce some definite outcomes?
Well, it has produced some outcomes, but I am also reminded that Mao Tse Tung, when asked about the effect of the French Revolution, said it was far too early to judge.
The move to a ministerial system may not have been a revolution - it was only achieved after considerable democratic debate. But I am confident that the new system creates much more integration between Ministers and between departments, and encourages better communication and decision making.
However for some of those not involved in the executive there is a feeling of frustration and lack of empowerment which the Scrutiny process has not resolved.
Because it is not working at 100% efficiency, there are some who claim the system has failed and should be scrapped. There are others who believe the new system is working perfectly and that it is the States membership that needs to change.
And there are those, probably the majority and including myself, who acknowledge that the present system is not perfect and needs to evolve. Just as the France we see today has changed considerably since 1789, so I believe we have not reached the final outcome. However I am equally sure we are moving the Island in the right direction.
Over the past few decades Jersey has seen considerable prosperity. This has enabled us to build the secure economic base which has made us so resilient during the global downturn. But one of the side-effects of this strength may be a feeling of complacency in the face of our current challenges.
I am certainly not complacent, and I am sure that neither are most of you. Forecasting the future always carries a degree of uncertainty, but I CAN be certain that we are facing a tougher and more competitive future - at the present time we do not have enough income to meet our expenditure.
The exact size of the shortfall I cannot say, but what is important is to accept that there is a shortfall and it will not go away by accident.
We are dealing with the shortfall this year and next by using the Stabilisation Fund. Some will say this has postponed the day of reckoning. I would argue the opposite.
Careful planning requires a beginning, a middle, and an endgame. They should all be constituent parts of one plan, leading to a successful outcome.
In this case the beginning was some years ago, when we decided, very wisely, to set up a Stabilisation Fund in anticipation of potential problems.
The middle game is in two parts. First, we use the Stabilisation Fund to sustain us through the downturn; next we are proposing a combination of spending cuts and tax increases, to position Jersey for a successful future. Ministers have given considerable thought to how we should position ourselves for the future. We share the view that tax increases need to be minimised and that reductions in spending should be maximised.
However we are also realistic about what can be achieved within the next three years in an environment where the public are reluctant to see any cuts in service and assume that everything can be achieved by efficiency savings or cuts in management. There will be savings in these areas, but further measures will be needed. Our business plan is a realistic, rather than idealistic, approach.
The endgame is a strong economy and a social environment which provides essential services efficiently and protects the vulnerable.
This is our three-part plan to return to a balanced financial budget. In short, the Council of Ministers is quite clear where it is going, why it is heading that way, and how it will get there.
Could we have achieved this under the committee system? I cannot say for sure, but my guess is that it would be unlikely. It is only with the co-operation of all Ministers that we can develop these kinds of major policies which affect every department.
Although we do not have a doctrine of Corporate Responsibility, Ministers have reached agreement by consensus on a major issue for our island and its future.
I cannot guarantee that this will always be the case, particularly since the Chief Minister does not select his Ministers, but I can say that voluntary co-operation of all Ministers is a significant improvement on the previous system.
So what is the connection between the Council of Ministers’ future plans, and the structure of our Government?
Well, at the start of this speech I spoke about the evolutionary nature of changes to our government structure. Part of that change has to acknowledge the lack of inclusion felt by certain States members, which may make them reluctant to take ownership of the Business Plan.
It is ironic that a Ministerial system which has achieved greater consensus amongst Ministers has alienated many backbenchers. Ideally the feeling of consensus amongst Ministers ought to spread across the States – while, of course, recognising that there will always be political disagreement.
I am optimistic that the revised proposals from Senator Breckon, which have my support and that of the chairman of PPC, will help to create that greater sense of involvement which we need if we are to achieve the best outcome for the Island. They do not resurrect the old committee system, but they do give backbenchers a greater sense of involvement.
In conclusion, this is not an end of year report, but more of a half term summary. I believe we are going in the right direction, but that there are opportunities to make further improvements. Before I retire I hope to see some of these further changes come to fruition. Even after many years in the States, I can still feel optimistic now and again.
gov.je