Fund PwC Airlinks Part B – vote Option 1(b)!

At its States Meeting to be held this week, the States are to consider a proposal to fund Part B of the PwC Strategic options review – Part A of their work.

Part B entails producing a cost benefit analysis relating to a runway extension as recommended by PwC. It is Option 1(b) of the Proposition to be voted upon.

In our survey, which concluded yesterday, 2020 members voted overwhelmingly to perform Part B, as follows:

Over 90% of respondents wanted Part B to be funded in one form or another. More than half respondents wanted the States to perform Part B in relation to a 1700 – 1799m extension, a little under half, Part B for all options. Only a very few wanted the other options, including doing nothing.

Option 1(b) of P&R’s Review of Strategic Air and Sea Link Infrastructure(P.2019/21) provides for completing Part B, the consideration of the technical, regulatory, environmental and economic aspects of extending the airport runway.

To recapitulate, we asked our members to choose between the following options:

Do nothing – don’t fund Part B. (The Chamber of Commerce and Institute of Directors made a joint submission which P&R received on or shortly after the 14/09/2018. In the section relating to economic impact due to the weakness in the island’s connectivity:

the impact would approach £100m per annum in lost GDP to the island”).

Perform analysis in relation to a 1,570m extension only. (PwC Report, Pg 20: “The 1,570m extension appears to be the best runway option if it is feasible from a commercial and operational perspective for more than one airline.” (However there is a caveat on  page 14 relating to payload restrictions)).

Perform analysis in relation to a 1,700 to 1799m extension only. (PwC Report, Pg. 20: “A 1,700 -1,800m extension should be taken forward as the primary alternative to the 1,570m option. There are clear additional benefits and it is lower risk in the longer term, although there may be a substantial cost difference”).

Perform analysis for all options.

They could also add their own preferences.

P&R’s 12/12/18 statement was strongly against performing Part B, but it did not appear based in fact.


2020 Association says “No” to more regulation

At its States Meeting to be held this week, the States are to consider a proposal to create an over-arching Independent Health and Social Care Commission to regulate all aspects of health and social care provision in Guernsey, at an estimated cost of £368,000 a year.

A survey of its members carried out by the 2020 Association has found that the overwhelming majority (92%) are against such a proposal, regarding it as a waste of money and over-regulation for an island of our size.

Members’ comments include the following:

Over regulation is a drag on the economy and with its box ticking, cover all, mentality often ineffective”;

It is a waste of money and unnecessary bureaucracy”;

Guernsey cannot afford more and more regulation and regulators”.

© 2019 – The 2020 Association

Brexit survey results

Between the 25th January 2019 – 31st January 2019 we asked our members “If you were advising Theresa May at the moment with regard to Brexit preferred options, what would be your preferences?” Here are the results:

Detailed questions:

Leave with no deal (i.e. allow time to run out)
*Seek Canada Plus deal
*Seek means of ensuring the Irish backstop cannot be permanent and press again for Theresa May’s deal with cosmetic changes
*Seek Norway Plus deal
Rescind Article 50 trigger (i.e. ‘Remain’, on same terms as before)
*Hold General Election
*Hold Second referendum

* in each of these cases, seeking any necessary postponement of the Article 50 trigger.

Our response rate was within the expected 30-40% for a member survey.

The results of our Brexit survey were striking with regard to by far the largest support being in favour of simply walking away from the EU. Given the paucity of independent analysis and information as to the balance of advantage and disadvantage of remaining in, or leaving, the EU, those members who are interested may like to refer to the following downloadable publication:

“It’s Quite OK to Walk Away: A Review of the UK’s Brexit Options with the Help of Seven International Databases” Paperback by Michael Burrage

The author is a former lecturer at the LSE, a research fellow at Harvard and visiting professor at several Japanese universities, whose expertise is primarily in studying international markets.

© 2019 – The 2020 Association