Monday 13 June 2011

“If the debate on school fees is lost tomorrow, the £65 million savings will not be delivered” Senator Philip Ozouf, Treasury Minister

 
“If the debate on school fees is lost tomorrow, the £65 million savings will not be delivered”
Senator Philip Ozouf, Treasury Minister - Evidence to the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel 13.06.2011

The first serious challenge politically to the Comprehensive Savings Review (“Cuts” in the colloquial) will come tomorrow as the States debates a proposition by Senator Ben Shenton to maintain subsidies to private schools.

The Treasury Minister Senator Ozouf recognises that this is the first serious political test for the policy of saving £65m over three years. Will the Senator be able to muster his forces to see his policy through or is it a sign that concessions will have to be made every time there is significant public dissent?

Clearly the Middle Classes, the foundation of the Establishment vote, are not happy with having to pay an extra £500 - £1000 per year extra per child for education at a private school. The state subsidy has been a little perk to the Middle classes to enable them to afford privileged education that might otherwise, for some have, been out of reach.

Senator Shenton is up for election this October and is clearly seeking votes amongst the middle classes most affected. Like his father he is a populist. Win or loose he will be able to say he tried and that will secure his reelection.

It is ironic that Senators Shenton and Perchard should be seeking to maintain private school subsidies, as both are “hawks” when it comes to the £65m savings and cuts to public services, and perhaps more so that the Treasury Minister himself. So why are those plus royale que le roy seeking to have his head chopped off?

The Treasury Minister sees the removal of the fee subsidies as justified both on grounds of user pays and efficiency. He is not up for election this October. This illustrates the point that the current structure of the States with its 6 year term Senators, insulates them and policy from popular dissatisfaction.

As I have been perambulating around the district, several electors with children at private schools have indicated to me this is their number one political priority. We will see if the Treasury Minister can defy the voting classes. If he wins, he will become the stage villain. He is not up for election this time, but it may cost the Education Minister his seat in St Ouen. Senator Shenton will take the credit, get reelected and then support the real assault on the living standards of working people over the next four year parliament.

3 comments:

  1. Couple of thoughts:

    - Bear in mind that the loudest voices seem to be those up behind De La Salle, two of whose old boys are Senators Shenton and Perchard. I have to wonder how much the influence of Roman Catholicism is playing into this - not least because as I recall Senator Ozouf was brought up RC.

    - Let us also remember that for all his populist rhetoric, Senator Shenton is not short of a bob or two - he owns an asset management company, he's VP of the local Co-op, ex-VP at Morgan Stanley Quilter. It's a long way from Dick of the Docks.

    - I'd like to think that minister Reed might pay for his various other failings in St Ouen, but that would require someone to stand against him (he got in unopposed last time). Will it happen?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes Reed will be opposed. Last count 4 were likely to stand. Reed may slip in again because the vote will be so split.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "The Treasury Minister sees the removal of the fee subsidies as justified both on grounds of user pays and efficiency. He is not up for election this October. This illustrates the point that the current structure of the States with its 6 year term Senators, insulates them and policy from popular dissatisfaction."

    Whilst we have a form of Ministerial government which itself seems to serve to insulate Ministers from public accountabililty, the Senatorial term of 6 years needs to be halved.

    That should be a major political issue. Even the President of the USA or the Prime Minister of the UK only get 4 years.

    How the heck can it be justified that anyone in our toytown government gets 6 years to rule the roost, without even the most basic checks and balances of party politics to keep them in line?!

    It can't.

    ReplyDelete