Tuesday 4 December 2018

Meet the Ministers - Part 2












Meet the Ministers – Part 2

Well-being

Arthur Morley asked about what was being done to tackle problems of mental and physical health, and in particular stress and depression., asking whether as well as measures like GDP, attention should be given to a “national happiness index”, as used in Nordic countries.

And he noted in connection that only 21% of the police said they would recommend their career to others – a sign perhaps of stress in the job, and also how middle management in finance often saw people under intense pressure. Stressful parents could lead to stressed out family life, which was bad for children’s education.

Richard Renouf, Health Minister, answered that well being was important, and there was, he had observed himself, a lot more stress in legal firms than used to be the case when he was practicing. An indicator of stress in general was increased absenteeism, as people could not cope with workplaces.

One of the ways to help was by Jersey Sport, which not only promited being active and fit but also well-being as well, and the transferrable disciplines needed to cope with stress.

St Brelade’s Bay and Coastlines under Pressure

Moz Scott asked what was happening to help protect St Brelade’s Bay, where guidelines were supposed to be developed, but nothing seemed to have happened.

John Young, Planning Minister, said that he had just signed off a letter replying about that. He agreed that St Brelade’s Bay was under great pressure, but also that there were other special places as well.

The New Island Plan, he hoped would be more selective about special areas, and in restricting a kind of development creep that gradually took away what was special. The Island Plan would of course go out to public consultation, because it was as much the public’s plan as well, and from that input, and other inputs, he would take a revised plan to the States. Work was already commencing on studying this area of concern, as funds were there to look at creating a local development plan which could be incorporated into the broader Island Plan.

In the meantime, he was able to use the tool of “supplementary planning guidance” (SPGs) to take steps to preserve the special character of places like St Brelade’s Bay.

Brexit

Andrew Le Quesne asked about Brexit, as time could be running out, especially if Theresa May’s deal failed to get through Parliament and what options were prepared for a “no Brexit” for Jersey. Were the Islands in a strong enough position?

Constitutional Affairs Minister Len Norman said that as far as he knows plans were proceeding well, and Chief Minister John Le Fondre said there was a Jersey Brexit team which had already undertaken a lot of work in preparation. While there was more to do, we were really almost as prepared as we can be for Brexit.

Pay Increases

A question was asked about pay increases, which had not kept pace with inflation for many years for the Civil Service – included Nurses and Teachers.

John Le Fondre replied that the Council of Ministers had to work within the constraints of the budget and the existing Medium Term Financial Plan.

And that seems a good point to end on, with a few thoughts of my own on the Medium term Financial Plan.

The Medium Term Financial Plan

I think the MTFP should be a guide, but it seems ridiculous for a totally new government to be constrained by it, especially now we have moved up to a 4 year period between elections.

Imagine in the UK if Margaret Thatcher had been constrained by an MTFP put forward by Jim Callaghan!! I know the idea is good, but if it acts as a straight jacket, it means a new COM is hamstrung by their predecessors.

We had something like that already when the budget was in September, and elections in October, and the new States were defined by a budget voted on by people who in a number of cases had left the States for one reason or another. It just makes no sense at all. As far as I am aware, Guernsey and the Isle of Man do not have an MTFP, or if they do, it is fixed for the term of one parliament.

Otherwise, what are voters voting for? Vote for me, and I’ll bring changes in the next MTFP the year (or two) after I get in, but cannot before that? No government can run like that. It is unmanageable. It makes voting a farce! It has to be: new government, new strategy, new budget, new MTFP.

If an old MTFP has to be in force when a Council of Ministers is elected, a new MTFP should be brought in as soon as possible so that if elections take place in May, by the following May, a new MTFP is proposed and voted upon, so that no more than a year's delay takes place, and if it can be proposed sooner, it will take the place of the old one. That way at least the 2019 budget could be free from that constraint.

As it stands, the current MTFP runs to the end of 2019, which also fixes the 2019 budget! That is wholly unacceptable. I did not vote for a drawn out year of the old Council of Ministers polices, I voted for something new. I did not vote for 2 budgets by a new Council of Ministers constrained by the decisions of a previous Council of Ministers. The logic of this just defies common sense.

This is one of those legacy issues which puts a new Council of Ministers into a straight-jacket in a way that just doesn't happen in other democracies, when an election means either more of the same executive of change. 

It has not been an issue in the past, because existing Council of Ministers were drawn from the same pool of States members who had wholly supported the MTFP, but it is an issue now, and in this respect, I am wholly in agreement with Geoff Southern that it is a bad constraint, although I would like a more regularised situation as suggested above. 

No comments: