IOD Annual Debate Review

“Weathering the Storm” – 2020 Forecast


As the lights dimmed for the viewing of the first film of the IOD 2009 Debate, there was a curious mixture of optimism within the crowd, and pessimism upon the screen.

The film outlined all of the potential future problems that Guernsey is to face in the coming 10 years; waste disposal, the financial crisis, the States, housing, the list seemed never ending. From the view of an outsider such as Alistair Stewart, the carefree attitude that lingered in the air must have appeared imprudent.
But how concerned should we be concerning the island’s short-term future? Difficulties surrounding the economy, pan-island issues, society and Guernsey’s political structure formed the foundation for this polemic.

With regards to the economy two main points were outlined by both panellists (John Davey, Chief Executive of Spearpoint; Senator Philip Ozouf, Jersey Treasury Minister; Peter Neville, former Director General of the Guernsey Financial Services Commission; Tamara Menteshvili, Chief Executive of the Channel Islands Stock Exchange) and spectators alike. Understandably the issues raised concerned the Guernsey finance industry’s health and integral importance to the island. Peter Neville began discussion, describing the climate as the “perfect storm” where everything that could go wrong was doing so. He deplored the reserved nature of many, who were considering the problem to be less serious than he believed.

Philip Ozouf fought back against this claim, describing attitudes as “Confident not complacent” but still acknowledged the danger to the island of the finance industry relocating from Guernsey.

One could guess that from this the issue of Guernsey as a ‘tax haven’ emerged and all members of the panel – especially by John Davey, acknowledged the threat of G20, Whitehall and Brussels concerning this. Tamara Menteshvili offered an interesting analogy of ‘Cowboys and Indians’ and proposed that Guernsey try to gain a larger political voice and to “neutralize the Indians” – an idea of prevention rather than cure was shrewd, perceptive and was welcomed by many members of the audience.

This discussion concluded the majority of the debate on the economy. And the issue quickly switched to pan-island concerns.

There was a battle raging in the room; a conflict between deep-seated island rivalry and the need for Guernsey and Jersey to co-operate. It seemed that the latter concern trumped the age-old contentions between the island and a unanimous vote was held by Alistair Stewart among the audience that both Guernsey and Jersey should cooperate more in the future. Nonetheless this debate was and is not without substance. Problems concerning underlying differences in the laws governing Jersey and Guernsey were brought up by Peter Neville and Nick Van Leuven (from the audience) brought forth “baggage” that Guernsey would carry with it into any political allegiance with Jersey – that of Sark and Alderney. Mr. Nicolas Van Leuven mentioned the “sufficient political will” that would be required for any such allegiance, but it appeared that this will was already shared by several of the States of Guernsey members and Senator Philip Ozouf himself. The idea of a ‘Confederation of Island States’ echoed back to the previous issue of a lack of a political voice; perhaps an allegiance of the two islands could help to bolster political status and could benefit both islands immensely.

In the Social section of the debate a relationship of a different kind was considered. It emerged as a general consensus among both the panellists and the audience that a greater dichotomy between the public and private sector in Guernsey was required to resolve insular problems. Tamara Menteshvili described that creating a greater “give and take” environment, one which already exists in schemes such as Young Enterprise and Management Shadowing, could be created to benefit the people of Guernsey. Senator Ozouf offered his cross-island experience, stating that; “Jersey politics are very isolated from people in the financial community” and supported this as an important issue.

Housing licenses were also high on the agenda. Lara Cuddihee, a student from Ladies’ College, brought to the table the fact that many teachers who come to the island have to leave within the next five years and that this offers a considerable negative effect on young people’s education. This highlighted the greater issue of the ‘training people and kicking them out’ culture that the Guernsey Housing licence department seems to have adopted. This problem is one that affects all areas of the industry from teaching to finance and to law.

The report by the Wales Audit Office, which declared that Guernsey had failed to pass six out of six tests on good governance consumed the rest of the evening. Paul Meader, president of the Guernsey International Banking Association commented on the report saying; “The long-term prospects for our island are at stake”. Clarity of direction, leadership, and levels of accountability were called into concern and Alistair Stewart offered the phrase “Unfit for purpose” throughout this section. Lyndon Trott rushed to the defence of his government, endorsing the idea of collaboration between Guernsey and Jersey and handling the probing questions of Alistair Stewart well. Although, his attitude towards the importance of the financial industry hardly seemed promising, “If I lose them, I lose them”, he said when asked about how he would retain Guernsey’s indispensable financial giants.

Members of the audience declared disdain at the bureaucracy of the current government, stating that fewer deputies and more bottom-up democracy was what the island needed to be led successfully into the next 10 years.

It seems that the best way for Guernsey to secure strong economic and political growth in the next 10 years is to collaborate more closely with Jersey, review the political structure that controls the island and (most importantly) to maintain Guernsey’s status as a leading financial base. Without this industry, what will be left for the younger generations on Guernsey and how could we ever return to old industries such as agriculture or tourism with the same vigour and success?

As the final film of the evening began, a more positive picture of Guernsey was seen, in the hope that these issues will be dealt with. But the message remained clear; the time to act is now and to leave these issues solely to the tests of time would be a foolish notion.