Thursday 19 October 2017
Statement from Deputy Mary Lowe, President of the Committee for Home Affairs.
'The decision by the Committee for Economic Development to submit its own policy letter seeking amendments to the Population Management Law, rather than taking up our offer to work alongside the Committee for Home Affairs as we progress ours, in line with our mandate and following the receipt of evidence from industry, is disappointing on many levels.
'There is a well-understood process of consultation approved by the States that should be followed to ensure the States of Guernsey makes evidence-based decisions on matters of such importance. In the case of population management and its impact on industry, the process agreed by the Assembly was for businesses to engage with the Population Employment Advisory Panel, which in turn would make recommendations to the Committee for Home Affairs, with us then bringing any proposals for change to the States for debate. That is the process we are following, with a policy letter coming to the States in November, and it is therefore rather frustrating that the Committee for Economic Development failed to respect or engage with that process.
'Added to this, the Committee for Economic Development along with Policy & Resources and the Committee for Home Affairs are all involved in the current review, agreed by the States, of the island's strategic population policy. Our policy letter will include appropriate interim measures which will not go against the States' strategic population policy.
'Regarding their proposal that would allow short-term permits to be renewed every year without the current five-year cap, it is of course important to remember that once an individual reached eight years consecutive residency they would no longer need to have their short-term permit renewed, as they would be entitled to an established resident permit, with all the additional benefits that grants. If agreed by the States, the Committee for Economic Development's proposals would result in workers on short-term permits being treated more favourably than, for example, teachers who receive a medium-term permit of five years. Why would anyone want a medium-term permit for five years when we're offering one year permits that will be automatically renewed forever, or in reality until the individual reaches eight years and receives established residency?
'The actual impact of that proposal, if accepted by the States, would be to drive a coach and horses through the employment elements of the Population Management Law to the extent that we'd effectively be implementing an open doors policy. While good intentioned I'm sure, I fear my colleagues in the Committee for Economic Development don't really understand the implications of their proposals.'
