To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Population policy by stealth
Share this:
THE Chief Minister answered a question in the States Assembly on 18 July confirming that he would be publishing a new population policy by the end of that month. Four months on and we are still waiting.
For several years the States adopted a policy aimed at net inward migration of an extra 325 people per year. Until a new policy is agreed, the figure of 325 is still being used to set planning policies including general targets for house building. It was also used to assess the size of the incinerator and the replacement sewage system.
Despite the lack of a States debate to endorse a new policy, it seems that decisions have already been made behind the scenes. A 235-page document has been published by the Minister for Treasury and Resources on the plans for the new hospital. This states that the size of the hospital has been based on inward migration of more than 700 people per year.
Buried inside this massive document, detailed tables show that the new hospital will have run out of beds by 2046 at this level of migration, just 20 years into its projected 60-year lifetime and well before the £275 million bond has been repaid.
The new hospital is a good example of the dilemma at the heart of any future migration policy. Net annual immigration is currently standing at more than 1,300 people. If growth continues at this rate, the Island will enjoy good tax revenues and a vibrant economy but the hospital will be at maximum capacity barely ten years after it has opened. Thousands more houses will be needed and the Val de la Mare reservoir dam wall will have to be raised.
Restricting immigration eases the pressure on services but creates other problems – ‘Jersey is no longer open for business’, tax revenues fall and it becomes harder to deal with the health and pension costs associated with the ageing population. The current government has left this important debate very late in the day, with no time for public consultation.
If the new hospital is built on the proposed site, where would an extension go? Under the new plans some patients will still need to travel for treatment outside the Island. Might it be better and cheaper therefore to consider a joint investment project to build a modern hospital in the UK or France to cater for Island residents and a smaller concomitant emergency unit here?
Related