IT is sometimes said that, just as consultants sometimes produce reports that indicate further consultancy work is essential in order to achieve the client’s objectives, so surveys produce results which, by and large, are what the clients expect to hear.

I am certainly not suggesting that the recent survey of people both here and in the colony of Guernsey was geared to produce any particular result because I doubt that any organisation – that lot in the Big House or their mates who profess to be the captains of industry – wanted to hear that almost half those surveyed were less than enthusiastic about their economic future.

However, given the published results what I do question is how representative was this ‘representative sample of 1,500 Channel Islanders’ – in other words, and simply as an example, how many of those surveyed had above average annual incomes and how many had below average?

I ask because we are told that 45% are concerned about house prices. Similarly, almost 50% are cutting spending on holidays and personal travel, while 54% will not spend as much in 2009 on going out to eat and drink as they did this year.

Perhaps things have changed a little since Herself and I first got spliced but I doubt they’ve changed that much. I can remember that not long after I paid for the licence I got made redundant and although I got some work within days it wasn’t nearly as well paid.

In fact, it took us a good couple of years to get back financially to where we were as we walked back up the aisle together and, as anyone who’s been in that position (or worse, as doubtless very many have) will tell you, it can be fairly distressing at the best of times.

Happily, the day eventually came when we became concerned about house prices, albeit in a positive way, which made a pleasant change of worrying month after month if we could afford to pay the rent. Similarly, we were able to look forward with a measure of optimism to a little more than an annual day trip to St Malo constituting that year’s holiday.

As for not spending as much on going out to eat and drink, I can remember us going down to what was then called the Sabrina Restaurant at St Brelade’s Bay – I’ve a feeling it was somewhere between the Biarritz and the L’Horizon but I could be wrong – to celebrate our third or perhaps even fourth wedding anniversary.

I know the world has changed considerably in the intervening years but I’m certain that there are very many families these days, in both Jersey and Guernsey, to whom house prices (other than rent), holidays out of the Island and going out to eat and drink are about as relevant to them as are the contents of the sale rail at de Gruchy’s relevant to me.

Quite frankly, the bulk of their cash is spent on basics and owning or buying property, going away on holiday and going out for a meal and a bottle of wine are all things which are fairly and squarely in the luxury category.

I think that it’s the recollection of having been in that situation myself that makes me get so annoyed when I see the importance attached to these factors in surveys which could – and in one instance does – affect all manner of things.

The one I object most to is the inclusion of restaurant meals in what used to be called the Cost of Living Index. I don’t know what it’s called these days and I don’t know if the cost of dining out is still included but if it is then as far as this bolshie little crapaud is concerned it shouldn’t be.

My love of slinging a baited hook, weight and line over the back wall of St Catherine’s breakwater is well documented – about as well, I would say, as the need I have to plug in to an intravenous drip in The Shed that is connected to a Calvados bottle, although while the former is a recreational pursuit, that involving Calvados is strictly medicinal.

Having frequently lost gear as a result of cormorants flying into what in fishing terminology is called a tight line – usually with sadly fatal results to the bird concerned – I have often been heard cursing their very existence.

That said, I know of no one in the sea angling fraternity who would do an ounce of harm to a cormorant. Indeed, the sight of upwards of three score of them flying no more than a foot or so above a calm sea is one I and many others always marvel at.

As Michael Dryden put it recently when commenting on suggestions that these birds should be culled for having the temerity to do what comes naturally to them – taking fish out of water – it really does demonstrate the arrogance of man that we should even suggest such a thing for no better reason than wanting to pursue our recreational activity.

It really amazes me that people seriously consider killing off what is, after all, a shy and rather harmless bird, and particularly so when I recall the furore from the tree huggers and their brothers when it was suggested that the population of urban gulls – which I classify as dangerous (particularly to young children carrying food) vermin – should be controlled.

On that occasion the tree huggers won and plans to minimise the danger cause by these pests had to be put on hold while yet another survey was conducted. I recall that we were told that this would take between five and seven years. I reckon that time has well elapsed but I can’t remember seeing any results.

And finally, so people earning salaries which run to six figures – not including decimal points – have to have free parking because they sit in the Big House. There is little wonder the public are absolutely brassed off.