Guernsey's Machinery of Government needs to change

09 Machinery of Government

Go to the other Priorities | 01 Taxation | 02 Health | 03 Economy | 04 States 2.0 | 05 External | 06 Transport | 07 Housing | 08 Energy | 10 Education

Members of the New Home Affairs Committee

Members of the New Scrutiny Committee

Members of the New ESS Committee

the present Committee System and individual mandates need an overhaul

For Islanders that have had little cause to concern themselves with how Government practically organises itself, there will very likely be little interest in the nuances of how Government actually manages and delivers all of the services we rely on (so long as they are delivered). The reality however, is that we have always functioned in a ‘Committee-based’ system in which responsibilities are shared across committee mandates. It is the case that those mandates then can be prosecuted by those Committees, without recourse to the Assembly, other than if they are actually challenged (with mechanisms such as a no confidence vote or even by a specific Requete).

Beyond those mandates however, new initiatives, normally in the form of Policy Letters are brought for Assembly approval and those sometimes bestow further powers on a Committee such as the ability to operate within certain Regulatory conditions – not necessarily always with Assembly further debate – although they can be challenged before implementation. There is no ‘Hierarchy’ to permit the prioritisation of resources – and despite being titled the ‘Senior Committee’, Policy & Resources (who have a wide mandate for funding and broad co-ordination of Committees), can be overruled by the Assembly – which is to all intents and purposes, Sovereign.

So far so good. Well, no, it isn’t. Apart from there being no specific forum for prioritising Strategy, initiatives pop up from individual Committees instead, which results in something of a bun fight when it comes to Budgets and certainly, there is no ‘guiding hand’ over establishing importance over how Government resources (both actual and financial) are used within Committees. There is the ‘Government Work Plan (GWP), which is a compendium of both past ambitions (in the form of States Resolutions), yet to be realised and current or intended ambitions emanating from individual Committees and endorsed by the Assembly as a whole. In a sense, the GWP becomes the lowest common denominator that will satisfy sufficient individual Deputies who sit on these Committees – and/or can obtain a majority vote in the Assembly. This is what is quite often termed ‘Consensus’ government.

The Assembly then, sits at the crossroads between Policy implementation and the delivery of Government services – and of course undertaking its Primary function – as a Legislature. Unfortunately, the delivery components of some services are spread across a number of Committees and this diffuses their effectiveness. It is also very often the case that a Committee can expend considerable time and money developing a Policy, only to have it hacked about on the floor of the Assembly. Not surprising when you realise that in almost all cases, there will only be 5 Deputies with responsibility for any particular Committee mandate and sad to relate, personalities and personal agendas will undoubtedly influence the actual debate. It is no wonder that so little gets done in such a system and it is even more of an acute problem when very controversial issues come before the Assembly – like Taxation for example.

Many Committees are increasingly trying to reduce the likelihood of Policies being hacked about on the floor of the Assembly, by having informal pre-briefings to which all other Deputies are invited. It is very rare indeed to get many to attend unfortunately and to be fair – time can be at a premium for many Deputies, who have their own Committee Workloads to attend to. It is no secret that Committee members have substantial reading material before their own meetings and sometimes the proposed Policy Letters from other Committees are a challenge to absorb before debate the Assembly.

So, what’s the solution?

Well, the underlying truth would be that if a means can be found to get high calibre Deputies elected in the first place, then Guernsey would always be best served, regardless of the system (Machinery) of Government. In a small, subscale jurisdiction like Guernsey, when you add the increasing cry for ‘representative Government’, you start fishing in ever-decreasing puddles for sufficient individuals with this capacity or capability – and indeed, can result in just ‘Tokenism’. Democracy does not really permit any sort of ‘filtering’ of candidate quality. That is the job of the electorate, based upon (primarily) Candidate Manifestos and unfortunately, increasingly guided by uncensored or verifiable Social Media postings. ‘Government by Facebook’ is becoming less of a spectre and more of a reality and it does threaten to undermine Democratic principles.

Despite this, one way of improving the quality of individuals is to re-apportion responsibility across the whole of the present Deputy obligations and introduce more of a ‘staircase’ approach to building up experience. Furthermore, there needs to be a much greater understanding that delivering Government services in the future MUST evolve/devolve and incorporate both technology and re-assess whether some services should be carried out by other stakeholders. The Third Sector being a definite candidate for example, for managing the £40-odd million of grants presently undertaken within Government. In fact, there is a strong argument for suggesting that Government should only focus on what it alone can deliver. In which case, the present Committee System and individual mandates need an overhaul. I will expand on all of this in a further series of posts but in the meantime, for brevity:

  • 10 Deputies should be elected to a new Policy & Resources Committee, representing each branch of Government services and functions. These have to be individuals with previous Deputy experience.
  • 10 Deputies should be elected with responsibility to oversee operational service delivery of Government Services, in conjunction with co-opted individuals with relevant experience and supplemented by
  • 10 Parish representatives who may have no prior States experience, but aspire to eventual election to either of the aforementioned groups. In many respects – an apprenticeship role.
  • A non-political OBR and Scrutiny body should be formed to undertake Governance and provide relevant oversight
  • A re-assessment of the supporting role of the Civil Service in any new re-design of the Committee structure.

The foregoing is quite a lot to unpack and I will do so over a series of associated posts.

Historical Reports on Machinery of Government:

Harwood Repor 2000
First Policy Letter 2014
Third Policy Letter 2015

Click to view