AN old Jersey businessman was on his deathbed, surrounded by his wife and three sons. Scarcely conscious, he asked if each of the sons was present and on hearing that all three were, he went to his maker uttering the immortal words: ‘Well, who’s minding the bloody shop then?’

It’s an old joke but, as Herself reminds me when I’m getting repetitive and not to mention when the third Calvados kicks in, the old ones are always the best.

The joke came to mind when I read the front page headlines last Wednesday – another debate on how to (or how not to) dispose of the Island’s combustible waste and the prospect of a repeat of a debate held just five months ago on exempting food and household energy from GST.

Not only that, Deputy Carolyn Labey is promising to return almost ad infinitum – ‘it will keep coming back’ – until she gets her way and, in a similar vein, I doubt that we’ve heard the last of her fellow Deputy, Daniel Wimberley, and his attempts to thwart the construction of a new incinerator.

Add to that Deputy Geoff Southern’s attempt, for reasons best known to himself, to bring forward a debate on yet another proposed rescindment, this one on public election legislation that he and Deputy Shona Pitman are being prosecuted under – and the reason for my recollection of the ‘who’s minding the shop’ joke becomes a lot clearer.

Deputy Wimberley is said to have spoken for three hours, having first been firmly reminded that the Big House is a legislature rather than an extension of after-school activities or a debating club.

While he was quite correct in saying what he did, Deputy Bailiff Michael Birt might also have added that neither is the assembly a 21st century version of an Edwardian gentleman’s club and, therefore, those members who consider themselves to be ‘in the loop’ should stop giving the impression that everything is decided on a nudge and a wink basis over lunch and a couple of pink gins.

All that said, my point about ‘who’s minding the shop’ is a serious one that should concern us all. Here we are at the dawn of a recession likely to be the most vicious since the Great Depression, having just been forced into making changes to our system of taxation which led to the introduction of GST, largely because no credible alternative was put forward, and faced with diminishing income tax returns and an almost certain pension deficit of huge proportions, and one Member wants to break a contract at a cost of a million quid a week for 12 months, while another wants to cut off part of a revenue stream.

Quite frankly, it just beggars belief and those of us who foot the bills for all this must wonder how much these three-hour speeches and two-day debates are costing, both in terms of that lot’s pay and that of the hired help, all of whom would be better employed sitting down and deciding sensibly where the huge cost of government can be painlessly pruned.

HAVING started this column with a joke, what better than to follow it with something which has given a lot of people something to laugh at, the letter from one Arthur Caree – are they sure about that spelling? – from where else but good old Leoville out in the sticks at St Ouen where, I’m reliably informed, they already have the phone and are hoping for the electric the year after next, although they might decide to do without given how much it costs.

Mr Caree, bless his cotton socks, spoke for an awful lot of bolshie little crapauds when he said that he was disgusted by the sad apologies offered by the much pilloried owners of 4 x 4s, adding that he owned a big, fat, gas-guzzling one because he wanted to and he could.

Furthermore, he went on, while his critics were busy hugging a tree or sorting out their sock drawer at the weekend, he was going to ‘tow my big fat boat with my big fat car and hopefully catch some of the last remaining big fat fish in the sea’.

Of course, Mr Caree was having a go – and brilliantly, if I may say so – at those who, without seeing the need not to generalise, denigrate all those who buy and use a certain type of vehicle in much the same way as they denigrate those who do not share their views,

‘I do not agree with you therefore you are wrong and, by definition, a bad person’, is what they are really saying.

They’re a bit like the bloke who wrote in, it might even have been young Wimberley, referring us to some study in Wales which seemed to prove, according to him, that recycling is better and more effective than incineration.

Unfortunately, the issue of how much it will cost rarely comes into these arguments and while it’s very glib to argue that recycling is always better, the fact of the matter is that precious little more can be recycled productively here.

So, just as we moan about the cost of shipping virtually everything we need the hundred and a bit miles from the south coast of England, with of course that little bit added on to make things profitable for the retailers, so we will moan even more if the concept of recycling actually means that it’s probably going to cost us more in the long run to ship rubbish out than it is to burn it here.

And finally…I see that Flybe are still managing to attract bad publicity like moths are attracted to candles. Does this mean there’s a chance that they might actually stop hiding behind the small print and admit it can’t be right that buying another airline seat would be cheaper than their baggage charges? Given this outfit’s track record, don’t hold your breath, just look for alternative carriers.