A Week in Politics

Blame the mass media, blame advertising, blame the mysterious ‘third way’ of Clinton and Blair, blame whatever you like. The point is this: we want lots of government but we don’t want to pay for it.

There isn’t a States Member who doesn’t want more money for some scheme or other – whether it’s recycling, a bridge to France, a better bus service, more education for prisoners, compensation for laid-off workers or airline subsidies. But of the 80-odd election candidates who stood for office at the end of last year, how many advocated more tax? None.

Some argued that the tax burden should be switched around, like the Jersey Democratic Alliance’s proposal to remove GST and replace it with a combination of land value tax and changes to income tax rules and social security.

But no-one said that the overall tax burden should be increased, or that the size and scope of government should expand. That’s fair enough – Jersey’s a pretty conservative place, after all, and we’re still getting used to the joys of paying 3% GST on milk and bread – thanks for that, guys.

But all this creates a bit of a problem for the new Council of Ministers, who have just been told that if they want more money for their departments, they are going to have to cut some things that they already do, raise income through charges, or support new taxes.

And it has created particular problems for at least four ministers, who got their jobs on the back of promises to increase spending in specific areas.

There’s Health Minister Jim Perchard and his plans for a new health strategy and the refurbishment of Overdale; there’s Home Affairs Minister Ian Le Marquand and his pledge to spend more on the prison, probation and the Alcohol and Drugs Service; there’s Transport Minister Mike Jackson, who wants cleaner streets, extended sewers, a new green composting plant and a road maintenance programme; and there’s Education Minister James Reed, who wants to improve the ‘cultural estate’, increase literacy and support university students at a time of rising fees.

They are in for a tough time as the drafting continues of the new Strategic Plan with its objectives for the next three years, because they seem to have three options: cut some of what they do now, bring in more money from the public through taxes or charges, or break the promises they made to get their jobs.

Expect all this to make for some uncomfortable conversations across the table at Council of Ministers meetings. We may even see an early rebellion over cash limits, which would be a fun way to start off the year.

And don’t for one minute be swayed by that reddest of red herrings, the fabled efficiency cut. Four of the current crop of ministers – Senators Freddie Cohen, Jim Perchard and Alan Maclean and Deputy Ian Gorst – were elected at least partly on the basis of pledges to cut spending in 2005. And how much did they cut? Nothing.

Outside the £20 million ‘change programme’ run by the Treasury Department, or the occasional suggestions by the Comptroller and Auditor General, there has been nothing in the way of efficiency cuts in the public sector. But everybody in Jersey knows someone who works for the States and gets paid an insane amount – it’s as much part of ‘the Jersey way’ as the Watersplash, bad driving and expensive bread.

And everybody in the public sector is looking nervously at the calendar and the end of the ‘no redundancy’ deal with States employees signed a few years ago as part of a pay settlement.

With the majority of public spending going on wages, you don’t need to be a genius – or even a minister – to figure out where those savings are going to be made, even if the most you’ll get out of any of the council is just that ‘it’s something that may need to be considered’.

Politicians return to action tomorrow for the first formal sitting of the new House. Although they sat in mid-December, that was only to elect ministers and panel chairmen; this week’s sitting will be the first to feature questions to ministers and debates on propositions and laws.

The 14 new States Members hit the ground running with the appointment debates, and it will be interesting to see how they get on with a frisky little Order Paper that contains 41 questions for ministers and debates on safe, simple propositions like the allegedly politically driven suspension of the police chief and compensation for laid-off staff at Woolworths.

So, that’s a nice easy start for them, then …