Guernsey Press

Deputies criticise P&R for ‘unrealistic’ saving targets

DELAYS in making savings promised by Policy & Resources led to the committee being told it should spend money in a different way.

Published
P&R president Gavin St Pier said that the failure was not solely that of his committee. (26274540)

Deputies Emilie McSwiggan and Dawn Tindall’s successful amendment will mean that P&R’s delegated authority, which it wanted to use to take £3.1m. from the Transformation and Transition Fund for Public Service Reform, should be used to fund other projects.

The deputies wanted P&R to spend on a wider range of public service reform-related initiatives, in line with what P&R considers to be the most pressing priorities.

The amendment came about after the Budget showed how savings that were expected to yield £4.6m. were more likely to come in at around £1.4m.

Deputy McSwiggan said it was solely P&R’s failure that the forecasting had been wrong and she said it seemed that the targets were over-ambitious.

‘The cost of unrealistic targets is that they introduce false hope into one of the most pressing and difficult debates that we face as a States,’ said the deputies in their amendment.

Approving it would give P&R the ability to use funding already agreed by the Assembly more wisely, said Deputy McSwiggan.

Deputies Peter Roffey and Peter Ferbrache called on P&R to explain how it intended to proceed and make its promised savings in the next two years, with the latter saying that he thought the committee should be given more time.

Even though he could not support the amendment, Deputy Ferbrache praised it and the attached report, a sentiment that Deputy Roffey echoed.

P&R president Gavin St Pier said that the failure was not solely that of his committee: ‘We all need to take responsibility in order to drive the programme going forward.’

Among the reasons for the delay was the finalising of the new States future digital services programme with UK company Agilisys.

Additional delays with the organisational design structure and procurement transformation delays had also contributed to the shortfall in anticipated savings.

On the plus side, £3.5m. had been invested in the Partnership of Purpose, and a further £2m. was due to be invested next year. Ultimately, the Partnership of Purpose was expected to yield between £8m. and £17m. whole system savings through the transformation programme.

Employment & Social Security president Michelle Le Clerc said the committee was concerned about Revenue Services and the amount of investment that had been made but without the returns coming through as hoped.

‘I believe we have been let down,’ said Deputy Jennifer Merrett. ‘We need to say “use that money more wisely and come back to us if you want more”,’ she said.

Deputy Laurie Queripel said that he wanted more detail in the form of a business case of the mechanics of the agenda for the reforms.

As the president of Health & Social Care, one committee which had achieved its savings goal, Deputy Heidi Soulsby said the debate was irrelevant since she did not think P&R would be able to spend the money the amendment would see allocated to it. The reason the savings progress was slow was because it had not been possible to get the people needed.

Responding to the debate on behalf of P&R, Deputy Jonathan Le Tocq said it was important to ‘keep the foot on the pedal’ and he believed that the targeted savings were achievable even if behind schedule.

The amendment was put to the vote and passed by 22 to 16. It now replaces a Budget proposition, so will be voted on again when members vote on the propositions as amended.