AND so, in a year in which the retirement age could rise, taxes could go up and services could be cut, what weighty matters occupy the parliament in their first sitting?

What affairs of state do our leaders come back to after a six-week break? What are they going to do to fight the recession, restore faith in government and spank the deficit into submission?

What – to put it more briefly – is on the Order Paper for tomorrow? An increase in gambling fees, an attempt to stop ministers getting free BlackBerrys, the purchase of some land at Plémont – and, as if we haven’t had enough of these already, a report on the future of Fort Regent. Fabulous. And that’s just the good stuff – there’s more besides.

In a sense, though, the Plémont proposition makes for an interesting debate because it serves as a weather vane.

The arguments are simple: one side says that the site should be compulsorily purchased and returned to nature because it’s a beautiful place, because it’s ecologically important, and because this is the last chance to do anything about it. The other side says that the cost – estimated right now at £14m and change – is too much.

There are side issues: whether or not the new plans are an improvement, the number of people who go up there, the question of aren’t we all getting a bit bored of having a gun held to our heads by developers –but the basic arguments are pretty straightforward.

And the reason that they make for an interesting debate is that by the end of the year the States will be making a similar decision between spending/taxing and cutting/saving, except to the tune of £50m, when they decide how to fill the deficit.

The difference, of course, is that the Plémont money is one-off capital spending and that the deficit is in the recurring revenue budget – but the principle applies.
Neither option, taxing or cutting, will be painless or popular – at this point, it’s worth remembering that the Comptroller and Auditor General’s report identifying £7.8m worth of savings did, after all, include vote-winning ideas like the closure of a school, cutting the States’ wage bill by £3m and shutting down the western fire station, and that’s only around a seventh of what’s needed to fill the gap.
It’s worth remembering also that the last time the Island introduced a £50m tax was when we set up GST, and that wasn’t universally popular either.

And this is another reason (you needed more?) to be glad that you’re not a States Member. Maybe it’s appropriate that the States start 2010 with the Plémont debate – because it shows in unmistakeable terms the price of cuts against the price of spending.

At the time of the ministerial elections, this newspaper ran a strongly-worded editorial about the key candidates. One of the observations made was that Deputy James Reed was not a credible candidate for the post of Education Minister.

It looks like we were wrong. Having shown the judgment and mettle to face down the Treasury Minister over cuts to his budget proposed in the Business Plan last year, Deputy Reed has kicked off 2010 with an innovative and bold policy change.

From September, one-in-ten students entering their GCSE year in States secondary schools will have the option of starting some vocational training on the side through Highlands College. Rather than taking GCSEs that they’re not interested in, these students can start learning career skills.

The most interesting thing about Deputy Reed’s candidacy was that his background isn’t the traditional academic route of A-levels to university – it’s vocational (he studied at an agricultural college in the UK before coming back to Jersey and setting up a farm).

He referred to his intention to strengthen vocational options during his speech at the time of the elections, and has begun to make good on that promise.