The result was clean – no extra nominations, all nominees receiving a vote of at least 30 (Jonathan Le Tocq 35, Charles Parkinson 31, Gavin St Pier 31, Steve Falla 30) out of 40 with Mark Helyar backing all of Lindsay de Sausmarez’s appointments, however the lead-up to it was anything but.
There are usually internal emails going around about post nominations but members were left in the dark. They found out from the media who LDS was proposing. Several mentioned in the debate that they didn’t even know if there were any other nominations. I think many sensed that several were going to stand independently and then didn’t. Chris Blin was vocal in the debate as being one of the unsuccessful ones petitioning LDS for one of the spots but decided to back her picks rather than get nominated by someone else.
Debate? We weren’t due one today, were we? Enter Neil Inder, who thought it best (supposedly) in the interest of transparency, to have the same public scrutiny for prospective P&R members as the presidencies and lone posts (i.e. proposer and nominee would each pitch, then the candidates would receive selected questions from other deputies). My feeling of the room was that it was mostly because of who it was and the way it came about (this should ideally be something SACC put to the house mid-term for successive terms) that the motion was defeated 21 to 10, many abstaining.
The Bailliff then said that there would be no questioning but there would be speeches. Then once Helyar had seconded every candidate proposed by LDS, he said there would be no speeches after all. Way to go for transparency! My opposition to Inder’s views and conduct are well known but I actually supported him on this, even if I disagree with his motives.
Break, photos and conversations
The Bailliff then ended the meeting following the results of the vote, at 10:30. He said the deputies needed to return at noon for a media photoshoot. So that gave them (and me) 90 minutes of downtime.
I ended up in the OGH with several others, grouping up in the bar’s lower level, joining all the little tables together in a long line under the conservatory roof. There was no way we could keep a conversation going with umpteen people in that formation with those acoustics, so I ended up leaning to David Goy, who sat opposite.
During the individual part of the photoshoot, I gathered from conversations who was going for what, then went off for a light lunch with John Gollop and Aidan Matthews.
Predictions for Non-P&R Presidencies
- Home Affairs (setting laws, the police, customs and guest worker licensing) – Between Marc Leadbeater and Simon Vermeulen. Both were on home last term. One was vice president last term and one wants the presidency more than the other. My feeling is that Leadbeater will get the most votes unless he pulls out.
- ESC (Education, Sport & Culture) – Paul Montague is interested in the presidency, as are Aidan Matthews and Sarah Hansmann-Rouxel. I think, even though LDS and SHR get on well, LDS will ultimately back Montague. Matthews has work he wants to continue on HSC and I think he would be better placed as vice president on ESC than leading it. Whoever does preside over ESC this term will be boxed in by the last committee and will likely carry the can for nothing changing. I hope I’m wrong.
- ESS (Employment & Social Security) – Tina Bury is well-placed to win this comfortably but don’t be surprised if Neil Inder stands to make it a contest.
- Housing Committee – Sasha Kesantseva-Miller could stand for it for continuity (it is her baby, after all) but I think Steve Williams will get it by a landslide, given his background as CEO of the GHA and his focus on this one position.
- Economic Development – With Steve Falla on P&R and Chris Blin backing Sasha Kesantseva-Miller, that leaves SKM and Marc Lainé. ML has been out of the States for a long time and SKM has significant support (as well as LDS’s blessing), so I think she will win by a landslide.
- HSC (Health & Social Care) – Others might stand (particularly Marc Leadbeater) but I think George Oswald will win by a landslide.
- E&I (Environment & Infrastructure) – Adrian Gabriel wants it. I’m not sure who else (apart from Neil Inder). I think he will get it.
- SACC (States Assembly Constitution Committee – things like chamber rules and changes to public voting are worked on here) – There are several contenders. Yvonne Burford wants it. I’ve pushed John Gollop towards it. SHR wants it but I think she will back YB. Cameron has briefly talked about wanting the presidency in passing but I don’t think he’s serious. Inder has expressed a wish to regain the presidency of this committee but I think he wants STSB more. Someone else is rumoured to be interested but they kept their cards close to their chest when I asked.
- SMC (Scrutiny) – Yvonne Burford doesn’t want to lead Scrutiny anymore, instead opting to stand for DPA (that’s planning) and SACC presidencies. John Gollop is interested in this presidency, as is newcomer Andy Sloan.
- STSB (States Trading & Supervisory Board – so things like the ports, dairy, States Works, Guernsey Electricity and Aurigny) – Marc Lainé and Neil Inder both want this. Others do too but are unwilling to tell me themselves.
- DPA (planning) – Yvonne Burford wants this and I think she will get it uncontested. SHR is also interested but is happy to fall behind YB. I admire anyone who is prepared to take on this poisoned chalice.
- Transport Licensing Authority – No idea. I don’t think anyone wants it. In my opinion, this should be rolled into Economic Development, with a significant portion delegated to the GCRA (Gsy Competition & Regulation Authority).
- Overseas Aid – I think LDS backs Blin, who still wants it.
Stay tuned for Friday. We’ll see who gets to lead in each area.
Tom Moore for Deputy 