Policy and Resources (P&R) spent months singing from the same hymn sheet – GST was unavoidable and the States needed to find 1% efficiency savings over the next three years.
But when it came to the budget vote, 23 deputies were dancing to a different tune – ‘Gimme More’.
Instead of the promised efficiency savings, they voted to spend an extra £15.7m next year, which was ‘Lucky’ for some committees but might leave some islanders with a ‘Toxic’ taste in their mouths.
So who changed their tune, who sent mixed messages, and who stuck to their guns?
Express has looked back at what they said during the election campaign, the tax reform debate, interviews, and last week’s budget debate.
We’ve composed an in-depth look at who flip-flopped and who stuck to their guns, but here’s the radio edit.
The flip-floppers
Deputies Lindsay de Sausmarez, Charles Parkinson, Yvonne Burford, Andrew Niles, Steve Falla, David Dorrity and Jayne Ozanne.
These are the deputies whose words on savings and government spending sit most awkwardly alongside their support for the bigger-spending budget.
The five members of Policy & Resources are all here.
They helped sell the tax reform package, which promised £20m in expenditure reductions, and repeatedly talked about the need for efficiency.
Yet all five backed Option B, giving committees £15.7m more than the alternative.
Deputy de Sausmarez called government efficiency “non-negotiable”.
Government efficiency… is non-negotiable. It has to happen and it is happening.
Deputy Lindsay de Sausmarez
Deputy Burford promised that public-sector savings should be a “continual process”.
Deputy Niles told islanders that government must “save more than we spend on new commitments”.
But when it came to the vote, they backed more spending.
Deputy Dorrity admitted his political instincts were pulling him towards Option A, but said his committee responsibilities had won out.
Deputy Ozanne had previously argued that GST should not be imposed until the States had put its own house in order. She also backed the bigger budget, albeit reluctantly.
The mixed messages
Deputies John Gollop, Sarah Hansmann Rouxel, Sasha Kazantseva-Miller, Ross Le Brun, Munazza Malik, Paul Montague, George Oswald, Jennifer Strachan and Steve Williams.
These deputies argued that public services needed more money, or that blunt cuts would do more harm than good. But they also voted for the tax reform package, which included the commitment to find £20m in savings.
Some were more candid than others. Deputy Gollop told the States he did not believe committees would deliver the promised expenditure limits.
Deputy Kazantseva-Miller insisted savings targets had to be enforced, while Deputy Strachan warned that cutting budgets blindly could undermine the capacity to make government more efficient.
If we do not hold them to these savings targets, we will never close the structural deficit.
Deputy Sasha Kazantseva-Miller
Yet all nine backed the tax package and Option B.
Deputy Le Brun’s manifesto declared “FAIRNESS, NOT AUSTERITY”, while Deputy Montague rejected claims that government could simply cut tens of millions without affecting services.
Deputy Oswald warned that healthcare demand was rising by £5m to £6m every year.
Their argument was that savings should not come at the expense of frontline services.
The awkward bit is that they had also signed up to a package promising substantial savings.
The ones who stuck to their guns
Deputies Tina Bury, Andy Cameron, David Goy, Marc Leadbeater and Aidan Matthews, and Alderney Representatives Edward Hill and Alexander Snowdon.
These seven opposed the main tax reform package and backed Option B. Their position was consistent: do not ask islanders to pay more until government has done more to control its own spending, but do not impose blunt cuts that damage essential services.
Deputy Bury warned that arbitrary savings would have a detrimental impact on services.
Deputy Cameron argued that shifting costs elsewhere was not the same as making savings.
Deputy Goy said the wealthiest should pay their fair share before ordinary islanders were asked for more.
It’s disingenuous to say to the public that we can make those sorts of savings that quickly without having really detrimental impacts on the services on which they rely.
Deputy Tina Bury
The two Alderney representatives warned that further taxation would pile pressure on an already struggling island.
Deputy Leadbeater and Deputy Matthews argued that Option A would put frontline services, including policing, fire and healthcare, at risk.
They may not all agree on how government should be funded, but they were consistent in opposing the tax package while rejecting the proposed cuts.
The £20m savings commitment remains on paper, but the three-year timescale is now optional.
And the States has chosen to give committees £15.7m more to spend next year.
While many deputies consistently argued against savings, for others the tune changed.
The risk, though, is that ‘Everytime’ our politicians promise savings but deliver more spending, it will ‘Drive taxpayers crazy’.
READ MORE…
You can read our in-depth look at who flip-flopped and who stuck to their guns, exclusively in Express.
