NEXT week will be a challenging one in the States for Chief Minister Frank Walker and the other members of the Council of Ministers.

Together they will face a vote of no confidence, proposed by Senator Stuart Syvret, who has described the executive as ‘out of control, deficient and undisciplined’.

Also tabled is a vote of censure through which Deputy Geoff Southern will charge Senator Walker with failure to provide the States with full and accurate information about Waterfront developers Harcourt and the court cases they face.

And the political drama will not end there. Deputy Southern is also proposing that all the Waterfront Enterprise Board’s directors should be removed and Deputy Gerard Baudains is demanding that the decision to appoint Harcourt be rescinded.

Senator Walker is insisting that much of this onslaught is politically motivated, principally involving figures who oppose most of what the Council of Ministers stands for. There could well be truth in this assertion, but it is also true that ministers have recently made a practice of staggering from one embarrassing gaffe to another – to the exasperation of not only their colleagues but also many of the people they represent.

The Harcourt debate fiasco is obviously a case in point, but critics could refer to other recent episodes ranging from the political handling of the Haut de La Garenne investigation to the worrying confusion over police powers of detention and, to take another example, Transport Minister Guy de Faye’s conduct in relation to the Bel Royal roadworks débâcle. It is, though, a safe bet that Senator Syvret will not be dwelling on other issues – such as the broad success of present economic policies – which are the other side of the coin of ministerial performance.

It will, of course, be up to the States as a whole to decide if the no-confidence motion, the censure motion and the sacking of WEB are to be supported. As always, there must be doubt about outcomes, but unless a significant number of Members whose sympathies generally lie with the executive metaphorically cross the floor of the House, the Council, Senator Walker and WEB are likely to survive the day – though the same might not apply to Harcourt’s present status as chosen developer.

Voting patterns could also be influenced by the very short time that the current executive will remain in power. Is it likely that a majority of Members will want to upset the apple cart with what almost amounts to a general election on the horizon?

Another obvious and crucial question to be considered is who would be likely to take over the reins of power if a no-confidence motion were to succeed.

However, even if ministers survive to fight another day, Senator Walker escapes without censure and WEB’s board carries on, important messages about highly questionable levels of competence, wisdom, public confidence and democratic representation will have been delivered. Survivors of this historic combined assault on the powers-that-be would do well to heed them.