BS 3

 What is the problem with Beau Sejour and why is it taking so long to sort out?
 
I believe there are a number of fundamental issues involved here starting with an understanding of what the centre is for.
 
Is it a profit making entity or is it a community asset?
 
Even if it is the latter, why can’t it generate a small profit? After all, we have several successful private gym and leisure facilities running on the Island so it must be possible to make money in this sector.
 
Another hint of potential profitability is the fact that at least three firms are interested in running Beau Sejour and so must believe that they can make a good profit for themselves out of the deal. If they can do it, why can’t it’s present owners?
 
I think it maybe a mindset problem. A mindset which thinks the centre is a service provider rather than a business and doesn’t need to make money; a mindset which needs changing if the centre is to remain in the public sector.
 
Then there is the possible mindset of the States themselves which seem to be heading towards privatisation of whatever they can get away with. Maybe this has something to do with Tribal Helm, the company brought in a while back to advise the States on how to run things.
 
Tribal Helm has since been taken over by the Capita Group which co-incidentally happens to make a substantial part of it’s own healthy profits from providing a wide range of services to the public sector. When you own a hammer then every problem looks like a nail.
 
If the Island’s current set up isn’t fit for the purpose of running a business such as Beau Sejour then perhaps the set up needs changing rather than privatising which will only see any profits going into private pockets rather than back into the community coffers.
 
Another mindset seems to be showing itself over the creche closure in that the redundant staff are being helped to relocate within C&L or elsewhere in the States sector. An excellent idea if there are unfilled vacancies where these skills are needed but do such jobs exist or is it showing that the States rarely if ever reduce their numbers?
 
If Beau Sejour is overstaffed then perhaps we need to consider redundancies; a concept the private sector manages to achieve with ease.
 
A job in the public sector should not be for life; another idea which perhaps has yet to filter through from the private sector.
 
I can see why redundancies are so hard to contemplate. It’s the thin end of the wedge and only a short step to then consider the A word.
 
Accountability.
 
Something which thrives in the private sector. Do a good job and get rewarded. Do a bad job and get fired. Do a job which isn’t needed any more then get made redundant.
 
Why is it so hard to bring these practises to bear in the public sector?
 
Is it beyond the wit of those people who pull down the larger salaries to do just that and manage their relevant sectors?
 
Here’s a plan to sort out Beau Sejour.
 
Close it.
 
Close it and reopen it as a stand alone States assisted business which is precisely what it is at present.
 
Mandate it’s managers to run it for profit and allow them free rein to do just that and within two years. Hire and fire as necessary to bring this business back from the grave it seems to be in.
 
I say seems to be because on the face of it, Beau Sejour is a thriving and successful enterprise with over 600,000 footfalls through its doors a year. That means that on average 11,500 people go through those doors each week and that’s a lot of people.
 
Now either the costs of using the centre are too low or the overheads too high. Even I can work that out.
 
What I can’t understand is why the centre’s managers aren’t allowed to get on with their job and do whatever is necessary to return a small profit.
 
What is holding them back?
 
That is the question which needs to be asked and which needs answering in the public domain; not behind some closed door in a private meeting with stakeholders. The taxpayer is a stakeholder here and should be made aware of the issues.
 
Perhaps it’s time that our elected representatives did get involved with operational issues rather than being fobbed off with the “outside of your remit” excuse.
 
Not at the day to day nuts and bolts level but a good understanding of the effectiveness of managerial control might not be a bad thing especially if tied to some real power over hiring and firing of those who don’t seem to be able to control their departments.
 
Radical ideas perhaps but not as radical as throwing away a profitable business just because we can’t allow someone to run it effectively.

So, what was 2012 like for you?

Now that we’re safely into 2013 I thought I’d look back and see what progress Guernsey PLC has made over the past twelve months.
 
Let's start up north and work our way down.
 
Lots of wind and water to Chout but we’ve only just sort of got around to maybe looking at the viability of considering the possibility of perhaps using alternative energy sources at some unspecified time in the future.
 
Speaking as one who usually decries the use of consultants I do think this is an area where the island lacks the necessary expertise and where we should commission a specific report detailing what, where, how much, and to what benefit over what period. The trouble is, someone might then have to do something about it.
 
A bit further on, we have Mont Cuet still filling up at an alarming rate. More talk about island wide recycling but the latest proposals have as many holes as the recycling car parks themselves. Most of us want to do it, but those that be want someone else to pay for it, and someone else to sort out the fine details. So we carry on as usual.
 
Down to the Bridge where Leales Yard still hangs in the air, threatening the future of the existing shops as is already seen by the ghosts of businesses past which now rattle their chains as charity shops.
 
At least we can drive down the road and find a decent and well run supermarket at last. It might be another nail in the coffin of the small grocers (if such things ever made it into the 21st century) but at least it is a proper coffin nail and not the pretenders we’ve had to put up with in the past.
 
Still no cinema to Les Banques but maybe the promise of one if a whole new shedload of offices can be built. Well, perhaps promise is too strong a word. Maybe just something to be considered as viable until the plans are approved and then maybe quietly dropped, again.
 
By now we should be to Town but of course the traffic as usual is slowing us up a bit. Still, as we’re to the bus sheds, let’s reflect on what a good job the new contractors have done with the bus service. Well, that didn’t take long did it?
 
More complaints, late and missing services, and the ongoing threat of strike action. And all of this from a company which was going to be almost like a co-operative with the Island in its sunny future. I wonder just how much money that deal saved us?
 
Back to the roads, the traffic jams, and the closures. It’s amazing how so many roads can be closed all at the same time and how we can have so many cars and vans generated by a population of 65,000 or so.
 
That “or so” by the way could be 10,000+; nobody knows, as we felt it prudent to duck out of the last census. Might have been too revealing. After all, being part of the EU (?) we’ve got to let in all and sundry, and, provided they live in open market “accommodation”, we don’t seem to care too much.
 
Not only can’t we keep undesirables out, we can’t even get rid of them when they prove to be exactly that. Thank goodness we now have our own little tank to sort them out if they get really shirty.
 
Before we get into Town, let’s divert to what should be the crown in C&L’s portfolio of responsibilities; Beau Sejour. This potential hub of the community is so valued that they are still considering farming it out to private enterprise to save money. Somehow they can’t figure out that if a private company can run it cheaper and still make a profit then so can C&L. Perhaps with the skatepark is on its way, the minister can now focus fully on the day job and we’ll see a popular result for the people.
 
Talking of community, I see that the Arts Commission is on its third or fourth Community officer in as many years. Must be a tough job to go through people at such a rate.
 
Anyway, let’s move into Town and count the number of still empty shops; now to be joined by one or two more, given recent announcements. Retail has been changed forever by the internet but that shouldn’t stop us from developing a town which actually attracts people.
 
Once upon a time Guernsey’s market shone leagues above anything Jersey could provide. What a good redevelopment that turned out to be. A dead market, a library now marooned in a pedestrian area far from the nearest car park, and a beautiful performance space seldom used.
 
At least the business world continues to thrive and has plenty of space to expand into, thanks to our forward looking developers who are able to cater for those sectors of our society with sufficient wealth to buy their fabulous creations.
 
The property market generally continues to bloom, unless of course you’re young, and/or less than wealthy; someone who doesn’t count that is.
 
Talking of counting, things have gone rather quiet on the Education front again. After all of that unnecessary fuss, a few faces have changed, some quietly shuffled off to other duties, and the post Mulkerrin report update seems to have wandered off into the long grass.
 
Perhaps everyone is too busy trying to achieve all of these savings FTP is supposed to produce. Not very likely given that the post of Chief Minister seems to be becoming ceremonial. Kings used to be able to lock people in the Tower; now their descendants open things or hold garden parties.
 
Nobody likes being told what to do but we desperately need someone to pick up the reins of government and crack the whip over more than a few heads. We need real savings and real efficiencies. In a time of austerity, we need to fund the basics and lose the “nice to haves”.
 
Our business community, and especially our internationals, seem to have little problem in cutting their cloth; why do we?
 
Transparency and accountability are held by all to be good things, at least in political manifesto puffs. Once the seat hits the bench, they become something which everybody else should aspire towards at some future date.
 
Take that £2.5m lost to a simple fraud. Did the civil servant concerned get sacked for cutting corners? Or weren’t the corners there in the first place; in which case, why are those who should have put suitable checking procedures in place still warming their chairs. More to the point, why isn’t our investigating press following up the story. Oh, I forgot, we don’t appear have one.
 
Putting aside the extra money it’s now costing us through that fraud, the airport project seems to be going rather well with minimal disruption. The massive amount of materials seem to be flowing well, and the tractor drivers appear to be more professional that the bus drivers if public opinion is to be believed. But let’s wait for the end result before passing judgement. Let’s see just what we get for our money and how much more air traffic we receive from better, up to date aircraft and budget airlines.
 
Moving into the country, the farmers appear to be holding their own, at least in supplying the local market for dairy products. Shame we’ve never really got the idea of marketing and export sorted out but why bother when now neither the demand or the supply is there.
 
Down to the coast, where the sea keeps reminding us who’s really in charge. After the hole in the wall incident was repeated a couple of times, the States actually commissioned a report on our sea defences. Unfortunately, that report suggested spending something like £50m over a long period of time to try and keep the sea in check.
 
Now, which politician is going to start spending that amount of money when they can put it off until post election? They did say a long period of time didn’t they? Surely that means it can wait a while then?
 
Ah, King Canute, where are you when we need you?
 
One would think that defending the island would be right up there on the To Do list for all politicians and civil servants but it doesn’t seem to be the case. Maybe they all live in the higher parishes?
 
So, another year of missed opportunities and botch ups. Another States, just as forward thinking as the last one.
 
Maybe this year will be different. Maybe this year will be the one when a true political leader will emerge to lead us out of the wilderness years.
 
Maybe.

Pay to Play Pt 2

C&L are revisiting the idea of privatisation of Beau Sejour so I guess I’d better do the same after my previous post earlier in the year.
 
http://guernsey1-2-1.blogspot.com/2012/02/pay-to-play.html
 
If a private company wants to take over these facilities it is because it feels it can make a good profit. There is no other reason.
 
So let’s pretend that we’re running BSLC and see if we can find this hidden profit.
 
Let’s start outside the building and with the car park which at present is free to anyone who wants to park there, users or otherwise.
 
Introduce a paid parking system similar to the airport, with a set free period of say two hours, which should be enough to allow all legitimate users of the centre time for their activities. Or keep the free limit at 30 minutes and allow the booking desk to extend the free period per ticket when booking a session.
 
With an annual footfall of some 600,000, the site must be a prime advertising centre. Can advertising revenue be boosted at all?
 
The theatre spends a lot of the time empty. Why not bring back the cinema but with a fully digital and large screen? Show films when the stage isn’t being used and show kids films during the holidays.
 
As a conference centre, BS has a lot to be desired and can’t easily compete with other spaces. Is this a market still worth pursuing? I’d find out.
 
The sports facilities seem incredibly popular. Are we charging at the right level?
 
Now this is a contentious matter and we enter the divide between running a business and providing an amenity. I’d suggest looking very carefully at this issue before moving the centre out of the price range of a lot of users.
 
If profit making organisations wish to use any of the centre facilities then they should pay a market rate and this includes the private schools who use the gyms and swimming pool instead of providing their own facilities.
 
Are all of the sports facilities fully used or is there something else that might be offered to take up spare capacity to turn a profit? I don’t know but I would find out if I was running the centre. I’d even look at non-sporting ideas if it fills spare capacity.
 
Is there a demand for the centres services when it is not currently open? Would this justify extended opening times?
 
A local garden centre has an extremely busy cafe because it has invested in decent seating and play areas. Could this be replicated here with a healthy ( and not so healthy) foods cafe which could also open in the evenings to serve theatre and cinema users?
 
Having tried to maximise profits whilst recognising the community amenity element of usage I would then have to look at costs.
 
Am I getting value for money from my staff? Can I reduce service levels (and costs) without impacting too much on the user experience?
 
Do I need all of my top wage earners or can we reduce the number of chiefs (if indeed there is any fat to trim, which I doubt).
 
Is everyone working towards the highest user service standards? 

Would the centre be somewhere a tourist would want to revisit because the experience was so good?
 
My personal experience as a theatre goer is of understaffing in the cafe and limited service when it is actually open. Understandable when 300 people all want serving in 15 minutes and then ignore the place for the rest of their time there. Maybe I’d be tempted to spend more time (and money) if I could get a pre-show meal and entertainment? I don’t know, but it’s something I would look at.
 
How energy efficient is the centre?
 
With investment in solar panels and / or small wind turbines, can it become energy self sufficient or even perhaps sell surplus energy back to the grid?
 
I’d be tempted to investigate wiring up all of the exercise machines to generators to profitably use all of the energy so many people expend in the gym but maybe this is too reminiscent of prisons and treadmills!
 
Despite the fact that I regard the centre as a community amenity I would still want to see it run as an efficient and growth orientated business. Can it be done?
 
Some private companies seem to think so otherwise they wouldn’t be interested in tendering for the business.
 
If they can do it, why can’t the existing organisation?
 
Identify the barriers which are impeding the current staff and tear them down.
 
I’d suggest that the minister for C&L and the boss of BSLC between them should be able to do this. If not, then get one of those clever clogs from Treasury to put together a proper business plan for the centre.
 
Several of the above ideas involve spending money but it could be money well spent if it ensures that this vital asset is working to prime efficiency.
 
Do whatever it takes but do not sell the family jewels just because it is the easy option.

Cultural death by a thousand cuts

Is the Schools Music Service worth £600,000 pa?
 
It’s a good question especially when the Island seems to want to save money wherever it can find a soft target.
 
The Education website tells me that the service caters for some 700 pupils, so that’s about £900pa per pupil, assuming of course that the big figure is correct. 

Doesn’t sound very good value for money does it?
 
But what do we get for that money?
 
A music service that’s the envy of every specialist teacher visiting from the UK. A general standard of musicality which is again the envy of those who know about such things. A vibrant Guernsey music scene across all genres.
 
Would we still have these things without a Music Service?
 
Look to the UK where most were scrapped years ago, and where incidentally, they would love to bring them back. How many counties hold Eisteddfods which reach Guernsey levels of skill and professionalism?
 
None!
 
Every year, visiting adjudicators, who work nationally and internationally, tell us that we have a jewel in the crown and should cherish and nurture it.
 
But with only 700 pupils this service is an elitist luxury and anyway, most of the parents can afford to pay for these music lessons so why should the taxpayer?
 
Yes, it is a luxury but if you are just counting pennies, then so are most things. Let’s scrap all of the Arts funding and, while we’re about it, let’s do the same for Sport. If you want to participate then pay for it yourself. In fact let's just close down Culture and Leisure and use the budget elsewhere.
 
We don’t need that many doctors, lawyers, teachers. In fact we could import the few that we do need and save the cost of sending our youngsters off for expensive training. Then there’s all of those useless degrees which we’ll never have need for; let’s stop funding those as well. Tertiary education is elitist so let the parents pay for it or bring in student loans and let the youngsters themselves learn to live with debt early.
 
This is all patently absurd but where do you draw the line?
 
Let’s return to music. What benefits are there in keeping the Service?
 
These 700 students do not live in isolation. They use the skills they are learning to enrich our cultural life. They feed back into their own schools and provide a backbone to their school’s own music making activities. They become better individuals, better team players, and better role models for their peers because music has taught them discipline, how to work as part of a team, and how to become creative.
 
Some will go on in later life to use their skills to teach others and to help generate music making at all levels. Some even go on to become professional musicians.
 
But music is taught in schools. Leave it to the teachers and they’ll do a good job.
 
Yes they will, but music after the basic level is a specialisation and you can’t progress a whole class to become musicians at the same time. You need specialists to teach music and you need specialist musicians to teach specific instruments.
 
But if we can’t afford it then perhaps we should rejoin the third world. Hold on a minute though, Venezuela has a world renown children’s orchestra and their El Systema movement is looked on as a model for development in lots of countries, even Scotland.
 
The third world appreciates the importance of music and don't regard it as elitist. Perhaps we should do the same.

Two different shaped balls

Anyone who follows rugby will be aware of the decline in the English national game culminating in some shameful behaviour during the last World Cup and the replacement of the manager.
 
The new broom has sought to bring pride back to wearing the white shirt and has returned to basics; hard graft and stay out of trouble. 

For a new team, the results have been encouraging. Encouraging enough to make the new manager’s temporary job more permanent.
 
He may not be the most experienced national coach but he has a lot more going for him than the last one who was hailed a national hero before taking the job with zero experience. I’d suggest the new guy has done enough to prove himself already and things can only get better. He should keep the job.
 
How is this relevant to Guernsey?
 
Well, English rugby’s administration still seems to suffer from the old boy network which at times seems to have held the national team back. A few team managers have come and gone, some not quick enough, and performance has suffered.
 
Locally, and in the round ball game, the players and like minded folk took the matter into their own hands and created a club side worthy of competing at a higher level than the usual parochial game.
 
Has this met with universal approval?
 
Not in the slightest.
 
Guernsey football is far more political and divisive than our own dear States and any threat to the established power bases is not well received. Guernsey FC do not fit into their system and don’t even play in a local league. The administrators don’t know how to deal with it and have struggled to accept the new order of things.
 
Even after nearly a full season of stunning success, the new club still faces setback after setback. Guernsey football has now got something else to be proud of and has attracted a whole new level of support. This club’s efforts should be applauded and supported by the higher echelons of Guernsey football.
 
Instead we continue to have arguments of their effect on the official national side who’s biggest competition is the inter-insular Murratti.
 
The answer is easy. Let Guernsey FC represent the Island. They are doing that already in the UK on a regular basis.
 
Of course that won’t happen. It upsets the applecart and does too many people out of a job. There is a loss of prestige involved here. 

Pride for the wrong reason.
 
There is another argument that tries to defend the many and long established local sides. Why should Guernsey FC swoop in and steal their best players?
 
Wake up and look at the real world. It is happening all the time. If a player is good enough, then they will want to rise as high as they can. If that means changing clubs on a regular basis, then so be it. 

Just because we have a small goldfish ball here doesn’t mean that our successful fish can’t jump out of it.
 
In the past, this has been encouraged and praised. We’ve taken pride in our sportsmen and women who are successful on the national or international stage.
 
So, what’s the difference now? Too many players at once?
 
The trouble is that those who should be banging heads together to create some common sense are the same people who need their heads banged.
 
It just won’t happen.

Pay to play?

How much profit should a playground make?
 
Yes, I agree, it’s a daft question.
 
What about if it’s a playground for adults? 

How much profit should that make?
 
Yes, I’m talking about our Guernsey Leisure Centre which regularly turns in a loss despite having, at times, one of the busiest car parks in the Island.
 
How can something so popular not make a profit?
 
Because, of course, it is not a business but a public amenity. It is there for the benefit of the people of Guernsey.
 
Now I speak as one who decries this Island’s obsession with sport and the over the top attention sport gets from the media. But even I can see the benefits of lots of people of all ages staying healthy and staying out of our hospitals.
 
The centre is also regularly used by theatre groups and concert artists. So it’s not just for sports fans. The centre fulfils community needs. It improves our quality of life.
 
But if we can’t make a profit on it, why don’t we just privatise it, take our money and run?
 
Now why would any sane business person want to buy something if they couldn’t make a profit from it?
 
Could we sell off Beau Sejour?
 
I’m certain that we could.
 
I am equally certain that someone else could, and would, make a profit from it. Jobs would be cut and prices raised. And for who’s benefit?
 
Why privatise something just to benefit some anonymous company and it’s shareholders?
 
Privatisation is the wrong answer to a question which shouldn’t be asked in the first place.
 
Let’s leave C&L to run the centre as efficiently as they can and accept that getting profit from a playground is just asking the wrong question.