A Week in Politics

The improbable star of the Business Plan 2010 debate made no rambling speeches, no spiteful remarks, broke no promises and ignored no painful truths. And yet, when it came to the time to act, our hero did so silently, decisively, imperceptibly, and seeking no praise nor credit.

Senator Alan Maclean’s copy of the Business Plan 2010 is everything that a politician should be: quiet, unassuming and tough. It’s also everything that politicians shouldn’t be, but frequently are: unimaginative, deaf and thick.

It’s strange that last week’s Business Plan debate ended in such a dramatic way, because as an event it was short on political theatre. But when Senator Maclean leaned on his copy of the 200-page plan, inadvertently pressing down on his voting buttons and turning his ‘contre’ into a decisive ‘pour’ on the Millennium Town Park debate, he made up for it.

It capped what can only really be seen as a pretty bad week for the Council of Ministers, and a pretty good one for the Jersey Democratic Alliance, who scrapped free lunches for States Members (saving: £11,300) and set the ball rolling on the Millennium Town Park (cost: £10m). As an aside, there’s a funny coincidence about the name – a millennium is roughly how long it would take for the savings from the free lunches to pay for the park, but there you go.

In a way it’s a shame that the ministers had a bad week in the office, because there were times during the debate during which they showed themselves willing to bend and compromise in a way that they never have before. On Senator Ben Shenton’s amendment to fund respite care and Deputy Carolyn Labey’s proposal to fund an eastern cycle track, they decided late on to grab hold of the handbrake and pull a u-turn – accepting the amendments, despite having said that they would oppose them.

And although tempers frayed on both sides as the debate cruised through the week, the opening day saw surprisingly and refreshingly well-spirited argument, without the usual snarl and bite that accompanies these things.

But it was an amendment discussed on the first day – one of only three that was adopted despite the objections of the Council of Ministers – that was the really interesting moment. It came when Deputy Daniel Wimberley won his amendment to require Transport and Technical Services to remove electrical goods from the waste incinerated at Bellozanne, regardless of whether or not environmental taxes are agreed.

Nothing wrong with that at all, burning electrical goods produces some pretty nasty stuff, and the incinerator sits just outside one of the most populated parts of the Island. It’s something that TTS should have done anyway (in fact, they said during the debate that they were doing it anyway, but no-one seemed bothered).

But the interesting question isn’t whether it should happen or not, it’s why would you vote for that amendment if you were going to pass the environmental taxes in a couple of months anyway? Doesn’t it all seem a bit pointless unless you’re going to oppose those taxes?

And that gets us to the point of the Business Plan. The Council of Ministers have to go away from it and tackle the parts that they don’t like, including the Millennium Town Park, with equal energy and commitment to the parts they do like. That’s not something that they have a good record on, if you cast your mind back to the winter fuel allowance shenanigans and the rows over the timing of the 2006 Census – both of which the States told them to do, and both of which they pretty much ignored.

And everyone else has to go away from it and reflect that with total States spending likely to approach the £800m mark next year, the money to pay for it has to come from somewhere. And although it’s fun to bang on about the incinerator/Eurogate blunder and the money wasted in the past, it doesn’t actually get anyone anywhere.

The States were looking at structural deficits of around £50m and funding crises at Health before the Business Plan 2010 debate, but you know what? £10m for the park, £1.1m for nurses, £500,000 for a cycle track, £475,000 for respite care – before long, it starts adding up to real money. Over the next few years, States Members are going to have to start approaching the task of balancing the books with the same energy and commitment that they put into the debates of the last week.

Maybe, someone pointed out to me this week, what’s missing is the ability to say ‘no’, or the ability to be honest about things.

During the debate, several Members made speeches along the following lines: ‘I support this cycle track/Millennium Town Park/free lunch (delete as appropriate), I really do, but I just can’t support it like this. I’m all for cycle tracks/Millennium Town Parks/free lunches (delete as appropriate) but I’m not voting for this proposition.’

OK. Let’s take the cycle track as an example. It’s going to cost £500,000. I think it’s probably worth it, you might not, and that’s fair enough. No-one’s going to start a war over it. But if you’re a States Member, and the States are going to spend £800m or thereabouts next year, and you don’t think it’s worth spending £500,000 on a cycle track, then – this next bit is complicated and States Members don’t seem to get it, so I’ll stick it in capitals in case any of them are reading – THEN YOU DON’T REALLY SUPPORT THE CYCLE TRACK AT ALL.

And that’s fine. It’s OK to not support the cycle track. But just be honest about it. One last thing – I can’t resist this: Deputy Andrew Green is the Assistant Education Minister. He has been given responsibility for sport. But he tells me that since he got the job, he’s put on a stone in weight because he doesn’t have time to get any exercise. Priceless.