“Managers promote stability while leaders press for change, and only organisations that embrace both sides of that contradiction can thrive in turbulent times.”
This is one of my favourite quotes from a paper from the Harvard Business Review titled ‘What Leaders Really Do’ by John. P. Kotter. The quote mentioned sprung to my mind after hearing what, moderator; Stuart Falla had to say on the topic. He mentioned that there should not be sell-offs, and that as examples the dairy and harbours should also not be sell-offs but should be run by professional directors whether those be handpicked Guernsey locals or from elsewhere. He continued to explain how the Public Private Partnership Scheme (PPP) could be best if companies believe that their abilities could benefit the States’ delivery for services. However, I don’t believe that this is necessarily the case for all situations.
Giles Frost; PPP expert as well was backing the PPP scheme, with which some of his argument I agreed with. He mainly displayed his ideas to say that the burden should be spread by “turning the government into a planner, procurer and regulator of services and leave delivery to the private sector.” Again, along with Mr Falla’s opinion I believe that in some circumstances this could be the case but in other most certainly not. An example where this type of scheme could benefit the island is with the Island Coachways Bus services.
However, as previously mentioned this scheme may not always benefit us as a community. Mr Frost came up with a convincing statement for PPPs, of which however I would have to disagree with some areas. Mr Frost describes the private sector as one that takes risks and driven harder to make a profit but we should still have complete trust in them, “If we are happy with our lives being placed in the hands of the people who look after the engines every time we board a plane or those who purify our water every time we have a cup of tea, then why are we not ready to put the same trust in the outsourced providers of public health services or schools?”
‘Not everybody likes flying, because accidents still occur’ is my response to his statement. What I really mean by this is that would it really be logical to ‘risk’ the aspect of necessary and essential sectors such as health services and education just so that the new privately owned company can drive hard for profit maximisation and their firm’s main aim? By doing so, it could jeopardise potential opportunities for the new minds of tomorrow. Is that the aim for the island? Of course, by making it a PPP it could still sustain the education and pose limited risks but there is still a risk of everything going. Leaving the education in private hands for delivery would be too much of a risk for the island, one which would need heavy regulating from the States in order to maintain. I agree with him that we put trust in the people who look after the engines of our planes etc but that is a completely different market in my opinion. The aim for those types of companies could be to maximise profits which benefits them, however for education profit is not the matter.
Next came to Stephen Jones. His overall ideas were that businesses were guilty of treating a corporate social responsibility policy as a ‘box-ticking exercise’. He makes a valid argument saying how businesses use their employee’s skills purely for the business and do not give back to the rocketing numbers of charities that Guernsey copes with. If they did, it would not only benefit Guernsey but it would provide real benefits for the companies themselves; a good advertising source for them. Additionally, I would second one of the comments given to the panellists, which was to introduce a new regulation or law that businesses coming into the island have to donate a given percentage into charities when setting up. This could immediately boost the charities’ assets because a small percentage of the companies’ profits could be or is likely to be a very large amount to a charity.
I am very grateful for the opportunity of being a part of the annual debate, especially learning more to what I already know with Guernsey’s economic situation. It was interesting to have a variety of panellists coming at the debate from different angles, views and topics to the whole situation of ‘Sharing the Burden’. What really made me think, is that it may be my mission in the future to be part of the debate once again.
Written by Harry Martel
No comments:
Post a Comment