Select a region
The Government’s plan to save £40m this year has been vague and ill-considered, according a backbench panel set up to review its ‘rebalancing’ programme.
The Scrutiny group, led by Deputy Geoff Southern, has published a report of the Government’s plan to find £120m of ‘recurring efficiencies’ or ‘rebalancing measures’ over the next four years, which aims to free up cash to spend on key strategic priorities.
The report isn’t a pat on the back for Ministers; instead, the review panel questions the scope, the measures of success, and the language of the savings programme.
In particular, it focuses on its first stage: delivering £40m of efficiencies this year and £20m next year, which the panel sees as an aspirational target rather than a figure based on analysis of what could be reasonably achieved.
Pictured: Deputy Geoff Southern leads the Government Efficiencies Review Panel.
Deputy Southern said: “The Efficiencies Review Panel takes issue with the way in which the figure of £40m of efficiency savings for 2020 had been arrived at.
“It would seem as though it was identified as the target amount rather than analysis being undertaken regarding what could be reasonably achieved and appeared to be a series of aspirational targets for the Government to impose upon departments.
“We have also seen little evidence of planned efficiencies aligning with the Common Strategic Priorities that the States Assembly signed up to, in particular ‘Putting Children First’, ‘Reduce Income Inequality or ‘Improve Islander’s Wellbeing’.
“Furthermore, the results of surveys and other feedback from Islanders have been largely ignored in the Government’s pursuit of efficiency savings. We found that the Government paid scant regard to people’s concerns about where savings could be made without further detriment to Islanders most in need.
“The lack of detailed analysis behind the business cases for efficiencies was also a major concern.
“There is little evidence that the ongoing programme of rebalancing measures is based on a strict value for money approach, or that it has been weighed in favour of closing the inequality gap.
“Rather, it is our opinion that many efficiencies or rebalancing measures have been driven by the acute demand for the realisation of cashable savings to bridge the budget setting gap, irrespective of the impact on vulnerable members of the public.”
Among its recommendations, Deputy Southern’s panel, which includes Deputy Mike Higgins and St Peter Constable Richard Vibert, calls on the Council of Ministers to make sure that there is detailed analysis behind the business cases for efficiencies before imposing them upon departments.
Pictured: The panel wants to see more detailed analysis.
It also wants the Government to stop deferring any project which runs counter to the Common Strategic priorities – which it has said it may do in response to the Covid pandemic - unless it can provide evidence to support the decision, including an assessment of its impact on society.
The panel adds that the Government should halt any efficiencies which negatively impact on children and young people.
Deputy Southern said: "It is important to stress that, against the backdrop of this drive for savings, we have not seen a concerted effort on behalf of the Government to maximise the potential of the assets it already owns, including a huge property portfolio worth approximately £1 billion.
"By not delivering an asset strategy, it is still spending hundreds of thousands of pounds on maintaining disused property and keeping hold of property which otherwise could have been sold to make up the shortfall of revenue caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.
"Instead of repurposing existing buildings for office use or putting our estate to better use for the community, it leases privately owned properties, wasting even more money."
Pictured: The Panel Chair accused the Government of "wasting" money by leasing private properties when it already owns many.
He added: "The Review Panel is concerned that the Government displays profligacy on the one hand, for example by renting premises outside its already vast estate, and penny-pinching on the other by reducing some services to the already hard-hit Islanders – the continuation of an aggressive efficiencies programme can only lead to cuts in services.
"We strongly recommend that the Government does not impose any efficiency which runs counter to improving Islanders’ wellbeing and their standard of living."
Comments
Comments on this story express the views of the commentator only, not Bailiwick Publishing. We are unable to guarantee the accuracy of any of those comments.