Reviewing & Renewing Our Relationships

Moving to the back benches later in this term has given me a different lens to view the way in which our government operates and how the political realm and public service interact. It’s not always easy to identify or examine a big problem when you are standing too close to it.

There is a tangible mistrust in Guernsey politics and very obvious frustration at our joint political inability to effect even small changes in the things which government does, or how it does them. Many politicians also feel this frustration.

The central question which has been troubling me is - if politics cannot achieve anything despite us all agreeing on a big issue – such as the fact that we have a housing crisis, then, inexperience and incompetence aside, there must surely be a more significant issue at play in our system.

I believe we should therefore invest more of our time and political authority trying to solve the fundamental question; ‘Why can’t we do anything ?’

Looking from the outside in, from the subs bench, it has become clear to me that we have collectively, over a long period, drifted into the trap of becoming players in a Guernsey political squid game.

Politicians are not allowed to get involved in operational matters whilst being simultaneously buried in unnecessarily huge documents, complex processes, invariably tenuous legal issues, tedious debate, all wrapped up in a web of internecine political intrigue constantly abetted by media and social media. This keeps us expending most of our creative energy infighting and competing against one another.

If we stand back from this and look at what is really going on, in my view politicians are not really driving the bus of public services, we are to a large extent simply looking out of the windows whilst being driven somewhere many of us (and the public) definitely did not ask for and do not want to go.

I was delighted to read that the new head of the civil service is putting accountability at the top of his agenda and that there will be a services review. He is right. But I believe reform needs to go much further - our political relationship with the public service needs a fundamental reset. That should be part modernisation and empowerment, part assuming more risk, part changes in process and government structure, and dare I say it, part freedom to exercise initiative and create incentivisation within the service. But most fundamentally, given our parlous financial circumstances, politicians must become leaders in substance as well as form if they are to be held responsible and accountable to the public.

So where do I think we should start ? Like any constitution it requires a clear founding principle – in my view a good starting point would be to adopt the following approach at a senior level. In ministerial meetings in England & Wales the chief adviser will state the regularity status of the department by confirming to the minister that there is nothing “novel, contentious or repercussive” to report. These three words, honed by mandarins over generations, completely describe the proper boundary between administration and politics and where I believe it now needs to be firmly reset – the clear understanding being that any matters falling within that definition are political and need to be escalated for a political decision.

In Guernsey, very contentious things can be done without any political awareness because of the concept of delegated authority, sometimes granted decades before, where public servants act independently in the name of their committee. Politicians are also held behind a veil of “operational” protection, preventing us from involvement in decisions, even though they are often made using some part of our own delegated authority without our knowledge, control or input.

I could give several recent contentious examples but that would require me to fall into the trap of playing the squid game again by restarting the political blame cycle, so I won’t. The issues I could cite might appear superficial or trivial but they lie at the heart of Guernsey’s problem – they result from a series of obscure delegated authorities across committee mandates which morph into policies, processes and outcomes nobody asked (or voted) for.

I am deliberately avoiding the apportionment of blame because I have reached the view that the obstacles being created are often, but not always, organised or deliberate – they can be genuine attempts by individuals in isolation or operating in a managerial vacuum to do what they perceive to be the right thing.

However, in the system we operate, it only needs one official, acting without clear central guidance or supervision, to be ever so slightly more ideological, disproportionate or risk averse than is desirable, for a problem to start to quietly develop and for some new rules, regulations or hurdles to be created, some new forms to be completed and in turn for costs to rise and some part of our society, culture or economic activity to be stifled.

I could give you many, many examples. These invariably directly harm economic activity whilst diverting, or absorbing resources or creating new costs we can no longer afford. This problem is creeping almost imperceptibly through our system like bindweed.

This is, I believe, the very root of our problem and also the very root of public frustration and mistrust in politics and politicians. The public does not want to pay more tax or charges to be spent on constantly creeping growth in services, processes or infrastructure which are inefficient, unnecessary or being slavishly adopted simply because that is “what is done in the UK”. I believe the public wants politicians to be elected to make and influence these decisions but I’m afraid that at the moment we are largely prevented from doing so.

Solving this problem will not be easy, it requires a fundamental change in organisational culture, effective management and proper political oversight as well as an unwavering belief that we can, working together, do better – and it first needs to be driven by public demand, starting with the forthcoming election, selecting candidates with proven skills and abilities.

I intend to stand for the role of chief minister if I am elected. My primary aim, whether I succeed in being appointed or not, will be to galvanise and inspire all politicians to work together with the public service on solving this problem because I believe it is critical to improving public trust in our government and bringing its growth and size under definitive control.

I aim to do that by working with colleagues and with the leadership team to help drive positive organisational change, implement clear delegation and decision making guidelines and supporting the team in ensuring accountability and transparency throughout the public service. That doesn’t involve bashing the service or its staff, it means improving confidence and morale, identifying best practice, adopting it as standard and monitoring performance against tangible goals.

We also need to help our politicians focus on their role rather than infighting and to provide more effective challenge - ensuring that we are enabling a “can do” culture where everyone is invested in the provision of cost effective public services which we can all be proud of. This requires, above all, vision and effective and inspiring political leadership, whoever is eventually elected to the chief minister role.