A property portfolio too far?

This criticism clearly relates to the centralisation of power in the Council of Ministers as a structure, but it can also be argued that at least some individual ministers have powers which range too far and too wide across the range of public duties.

This view is held by, among others, Environment Minister Rob Duhamel, who is seriously concerned about the dual role of the Treasury Minister as the person in charge of States funds and of the public property portfolio.

The Deputy, who explained his position at a Scrutiny hearing, said he believed that the minister holding the purse strings should not have the final say over the disposal or acquisition of public property.

Specifically, he alleged that the present Treasury Minister, Senator Philip Ozouf, brought to an end the investigation of certain sites for a new police station and a new hospital, wasting substantial sums in the process.

The Deputy’s criticism might have some of the hallmarks of a personal attack, but the issue that he raised should not be seen in this light. More properly, the question of the extent of the powers of any Treasury Minister deserves to be under consideration.

It can be argued that the Treasury portfolio is already the most important in government in terms of its incumbent’s potential to make or break the Island. It is, therefore, legitimate to ask whether a single politician should be charged with overseeing not only public income and expenditure, but also public property assets. Should one man – or woman – be expected to bear this joint burden?

The answer must be an emphatic ‘no’, but that raises the matter of where ultimate responsibility for real estate should lie. Deputy Duhamel argues that Jersey Property Holdings should, as was formerly the case, be part of Planning and Environment.

He would presumably extend the argument to encompass the Treasury Minister’s even more significant remit in the new States of Jersey Development Company quango.

There is apparent logic in this, though it poses another difficult question – how extensive, and onerous, should the powers of the Environment Minister be?