Alex Curtis for Deputy of St Clement

Jersey doesn’t have a population policy. Despite yearly ‘Common Population Policy Reports’ being published, the States and the Government have not set out a vision for maintaining a sustainable population in to the years to come.

I am firmly of the view that we cannot grow our population indefinitely. It would seem many are pushing for increased inward migration to grow or sustain the working population, yet doing so in a vacuum of policy leads to challenges on housing and infrastructure.

We have to face some tough challenges around the ageing population honestly, and foster an island that can live within its capacity.

This means considering the following when looking at policies that impact population such as inward migration.

• Pressure on the Road Network
• Constraints on our water and energy supplies
• The impact increased development has on Jersey’ character and way of life

Looking ahead to create a sustainable island requires us acknowledge the challenges and address how we support our population and remain financially viable. It’s a debate that should happen at the Assembly level, with members equipped to know what lever we have, and the consequences of using these.

Education funding is the second largest spend of our General Revenue Income, with the two main departments spending the following;

• Education and Lifelong Learning - £182 million

• Children and Families - £51 million

Source States of Jersey 2025 Annual Report and Accounts.pdf

Spending and staffing has increased significantly over the past ten years, despite now stable numbers of students. We must now ensure that spending is sustainable in terms of finances, but also the distribution of this funding is fair.

Education and Inclusion in Schools

The 2025 SEND Review (Independent Review of Inclusion in Jersey Schools published) and the 2021 NASEN Review produced several findings and recommendations in response to the changing demands on special and additional educational needs in our education system.

There is concern that simply driving additional spend without a ‘clear cohesive strategy’ will put untreatable pressure on our Government finances. We must look at the long term impacts of such spending - should demands for additional money force us in to debt or drive us to an uncompetitive economic (tax) position, we will be damaging the future strength of the island that an inclusive society will rely on.

We must look at models of inclusive education outside the UK (which has struggled to deliver a financially sustainable model of inclusive education) and perhaps place more focus on inclusion at a school level rather than the student. A change in focus would not change that we will still need a system that can identify and provide targeted and enhanced support for those with particularly complex or nuanced educational needs.

Further Education Funding

Following the implementation of the new funding model for university education in 2018 States Assembly | P-33-2018, there has been significant support for those going to university.

The total budget for Skills and Student Finance is over £20 million per year (Page 22 of the Annual Report Annex Annual Report and Accounts 2025 Annex 1 Government Department Annual Reports.pdf), and the sums involved can be seen by this statement in the annex on variation.

The number of students in higher education has been uncharacteristically low in 2025, resulting in an underspend of £3.7 million at the end of 2025.

Some feel there is still inequity, with less support for vocational training, and that the grant system should not have the level of means testing it does. To ensure sustainable financing, we should consider a hybrid grant and loan system for funding.

There has been pushback on loan systems due to administrative burdens, but improvements in digital and AI should mean we can implement streamlined systems.

A loan system would enable those whose parents’ income restricts their access to grants to be independent - and it offers a range of policy ’levers’ to deliver against some of the key themes being raised at this election.

• To encourage islanders to use their skills on island, we could make the interest on the loan element 0% when living on island (this is what New Zealand does with their student loan)

• To encourage and support islanders into essential careers we need on island, we could convert/write off loans where an “essential” skill is brought back on island, such as health professionals (to give one example)

• With a loan system in place, we could extend the offering to enable greater lifelong learning and further education, such as supporting those pursuing Masters, or those retraining in vocational or professional skills not funded by a workplace.

In all cases, I would not advocate for a UK style loan, in the way that interest rates are so high that the student could not escape these. We can still ‘subsidise’ the loan with low interest where it is applied.

Jersey has seen a significant level of development over the past thirty years, and in a form that has changed the character and mix of living.

Comparing data from the 2001, 2011 and 2021 census’ show us the how housing supply and mix have changed.

Further schemes post 2021 may well have increased the proportion of flats in Jersey.

It is often argued we must build more ‘densely’ to meet our housing needs, but this assumes we want to grow our population, and also that everyone is happy with ‘apartment living’.

As someone who currently lives in a flat, I am not suggesting we don’t want or need flats as part of our housing stock. What I do think is that promoting (through our housing) that flats become the de-facto type of housing to accept in Jersey is not sustainable.

We must recognise that the demand for housing we thought existed no longer exists. Plenty of housing is approved to be built or is under construction, and our population is not growing. We can now focus on the right mix of housing.

Density Standards

In 2023 (minor revision 2025), the Environment Minister published Density Standards for development across the Built-up areas (BUA) of Jersey Density standards.

This promotes minimum density levels to ensure the ‘best use of land’. These density standards inevitably push developers towards flats, and on Planning we’ve even seen schemes in the BUA outside St. Helier that look cramped yet under the minimum density expected.

We are also seeing schemes on the town fringes that propose housing density well in excess of the minimum of 50 dwellings per hectare, with one recent scheme in a residential area mostly surrounded by terraced and semi-detached housing proposing 160 dwellings per hectare.

If we are to have density standards, they should push for lower densities than currently set. When set as a standard, the main impact should be to lower the land value given the yield will be lower, not just drive costs of developments up.

Our density standards should also consider upper limits - area specific - to ensure we don’t approve inappropriate high density schemes on sites well suited for houses or less dense living, with larger gardens, communal areas, or more parking.

Housing Mix

As part of reviewing our housing demand and the impacts on density, we should be firm in our policies to promote the retention or development of houses.

Houses come in many forms, from detached with large gardens - to tightly knit together terraces.

Houses provide gardens, are more typically suited to family living in Jersey, and provide the owner more control over their home’s feel - from extensions, modifications to repairs.

I strongly believe that a reason many young people don’t see a future in the island is they don’t want to live long-term in an apartment development. If we are serious about creating an island fit for generations, we must ensure houses form a greater part of our Island Plan, and their replacement with flats in not encouraged as much as currently.

Regulation is important in Government and serves a purpose. it should enable the island’s businesses to provide services locally and globally with a good reputation and provide the necessary safeguards for consumers.

What we must do is make sure the regulation imposed by Government, and its regulators such as the JFSC (Jersey Financial Services Commission) and the JOIC (Jersey Office of the Information Commissioner) is balanced and proportionate.

Reducing Fees

Our financial services industry has driven a need for high levels of regulation, but this has filtered in to other aspects of the local economy. Local businesses must pay hundreds of pounds per year just to register their business, and then more to have it registered with the JOIC, which in 2024 had an income of over £2.3 million and circa 20 staff.

We must drive our regulators to embrace technology and efficiency, and deliver reductions in business fees where possible.

The ‘inaction’, or perhaps ‘mis-action’ around the Hospital over decades now has been one of the greatest frustrations of islanders, and has likely driven voter apathy in the Assembly.

‘Perfect is the enemy of progress’, and delivering massive new infrastructure like a Hospital on a constrained island forces unpopular decisions, or lack of. We have seen various reasons to ’not build’, but this has to stop.

It is understandable why we have ended up where we have, but that should be a lesson not to repeat, and instead to make decisions and deliver for the island.

Overdale

The Acute hospital at Overdale must not be delayed or changed for political purposes. The proposals are acceptable, the planning achieved, the land purchased, and the ground works prepared. We must support the relevant minister to contract on delivery, but also ensure we do not accept an unfavourable contract.

What comes after Overdale?

As a member of the Hospital Review Scrutiny Panel, I have had the chance to follow the Minister and his team’s work on the wider ‘New Healthcare Facilities Programme’.

Whilst we should support Overdale and its construction, I have some uncertainty over the wider plan for other healthcare facilities.

The current model is that of “multi-site” facilities, with other sites including;

• Enid Quenault Health and Wellbeing Centre

• Glouchester Street (and Kensington Place)

• St Saviour (and its proposed Health Village)

• Samares at St Ewolds Rehabilitation Unit

The plans are to redevelop Kensington Place and develop a ‘village’ around St. Saviour’s facilities to the north of La Rue De La Hougue Bie.

Not only must we be thinking about capital cost, we must ensure that Government is providing the correct services. This growing footprint of health will need staffing, and staff accommodation and a workforce plan must be understood.

Do we need to deliver the services proposed at St. Saviour instead of co-locating with ambulatory facilities in town? Do the plans still require the space retained in Kensington Place now that we are retaining Enid Quenault for longer than originally planned?

Work on sustainable healthcare funding seems to have slowed in the past few years, and this should be understood prior to new sites being developed.

All the questions about Healthcare sites should fall within a well understood and consulted strategy, before more money is spent on architects, planners, consultants and land.

Finding ways to provide choice and freedom back to the public isn’t easy! ‘Deregulation’ is thrown around consistently but few concrete examples seem be presented when pushed for examples.

One key area we can safely ‘deregulate’ is in our driving license categories. What might seem like small changes would enable more choice for islanders to travel around how they wish, and we can learn from jurisdictions that have already done this.

Provide Moped Licenses to Car License holders.

We allow moped licenses at the age 16 following the same route as other motorbike licenses;

1. Pass a CBT (Compulsory Basic Training)
2. Pass a theory test.
3. Pass a practical test.

We require this even if a car driver has years or decades of driving experience. Mopeds are restricted to less than 50kmph and are their legal requirements are considered national policy under the Vienna Convention for motoring licenses.

If we gave all car drivers a moped license so long as they pass a CBT, we could give motorists more choice for travel without all the work of the tests.

This is the policy in place at the moment in the UK and other countries. It works well, given holding a car license proves the theory and practical knowledge of the road, whilst a CBT ensures the rider can handle the moped itself.

Reinstate higher trailer towing limits with a car license.

In 2021, faced with an HGV shortage, the UK Government chose to merge the trailer license class (E) back with car licenses (B),l removing the need for a further test to tow up to 3500kg. Previously a car driver could tow only up to 750kg if their license was from after 1997.

Three years on, the UK Government published a review into their policy and found now material reasons to change it back, even though pressure on tests had since fallen. It’s an example of giving back control and options to islanders, who may then chose to take up sailing or camping where they wouldn’t before.

Is it safe? The UK report suggests so, and common sense explains why - You quickly learn if you’re not ready to tow a trailer, and you’ll in most events learn with someone else, just like you would on a provisional license.

Introduce a High Power/Speed E-Bike Category

Although there has been occasional talk about it, we still are no further on introducing an easy way to ride higher power electric bicycles on the roads.

‘S-pedelecs’ are capable of up to 28mph (45kmph) yet currently fall in between our moped and e-bike regulations. We should aim to get these bikes on the road. We could use moped licensing or another lightweight test, but could exempt the vehicles from registration - creating a genuine choice for road users.

This year, the States Assembly agreed new regulations to enact a new Food Law. This will introduce a licensing scheme for all food producers, from pubs serving crisps to butchers and farmers.

The intentions of this are well meaning, and some elements of it such as better allergen labelling should be welcomed.

As a member of the Environment Housing and Infrastructure Scrutiny Panel, we scrutinised the new law and found that it is at risk of over-regulating. Charities, community groups and even hedge veg stalls are at risk of needing licensing, and the fees that go with it (Some proposed to be up to £500 per year for a single business). Our report captured this, and my speeches in the Assembly show a record of pushing for a proportionate approach.

As we move to implementation, we must ensure that guidelines and processes secure what really matters from our food operators, and doesn’t impose costs which aren’t needed, as these hit smaller businesses hardest.

Businesses provide both the jobs that create our economy, and provide services that make the island attractive and functional for both locals and visitors alike.

What virtually all businesses require, however, is a place to trade from.

Whether, industrial, offices, agricultural, recreation, retail, hospitality, visitor accommodation or something else entirely, land and sites are essential to run businesses, with each sector typically having their own requirements.

Island Plans’ have typically sought to ‘protect’ employment land, recognising we cannot just ‘create new sites’. This is typically done by ensuring that sites are retained in an industry, or marketed for sale and lease, prior to losing that site from the land stock.

These protections haven’t always been strong or wide enough, and so we’ve lost a range of good sites to housing, which provide only an insular benefit to the occupant, not the economy or community.

Despite most types of employment land having some form of protection, there have been two noticeable exemptions in both the 2011 and 2022 Plans. Hotels and Offices.

The need to protect hotels

Jersey needs a tourism industry. We know that island connectivity is essential, for finance, health and our wider economy, and tourism provides valuable use of our ports, whilst contributing to economic spend, and supporting local businesses like hospitality and leisure that make the island an attractive and enjoyable place to live.

Despite this, there has been constant push-back at protecting our hotel stock from conversion to housing, to the extend these sites are not ‘protected’. The arguments provided for this are weak and can be overcome. The main one I have heard is that hoteliers need a residential valuation of the land to be able to borrow to invest (Government could support with loans) and others just suggest ‘it’s the owners’ retirement fund’.

Because of this, we’ve lost hotel sites like the Waters Edge, Miramar, the Windmills, the Samares Coast Hotel to name just a few - and almost lost the Savoy.

Whilst some of these sites might have no longer suited visitor accommodation, our planning system should have at least ’tested the water for a new operator’, before allowing the loss of these sites. ‘Protecting’ does not mean a prohibition, it is simply a market test, to ensure new operators can buy or lease the site.

Many of our hotels were built in locations and to a scale because they supported the visitor economy. We cannot provide new hotels without harming the landscape and character of many areas - for example, how could we provide more accommodation in our northern bays.

We are fortunate that both The Savoy and Millbrook House Hotel are being retained, but the new owner of the Savoy may well have paid ‘over the odds’ for a site with residential permissions, compared to a purchase at a hotel valuation. This inflates land values, and makes it lowers money available to invest to make our sites relevant and suitable for this generation.

I want to see us bring in ‘market testing’ protections, to ensure these sites can be purchased at fair rates by those who wish to invest in our visitor economy.

A chance to look at office accommodation

The other exemption that currently exists is that for ‘office’ space. This exemption was provided in the view that office accommodation demands are changing, with greater investment shifting westward to the IFC and consolidating around newer ‘A grade’ stock.

As such, we have seen large amounts of less desirable and cheaper office accommodation be converted in to housing, typically flat conversions.

Whilst the loss of some of this stock in return for housing isn’t inherently bad, there doesn’t seem to be a good reason why ‘market testing’ shouldn’t also apply here. There is a demand for a range of office space, so especially if a sitting tenant wishes to remain, that should go to show the site is still in demand.

Looking beyond their current use as office accommodation, these sites are still ’employment land’, and I think we should consider how they could serve other employment uses, especially in St. Helier. Other sectors are feeling pressure for space, such as medical, recreational and hospitality, and a staged approach to ‘redundancy of use’ could help support businesses to start and grow.

Where we do allow office space to be converted to residential, we should ensure that greater protection is given to ground floor uses. Securing an active frontage and ground-floor spaces will help protect the vibrancy and economic vitality of St. Helier.

A wider look at how sites are marketed

In considering how we protect ’employment land’ - requiring market testing - I do have sympathy with those who find the current approach difficult to prove.

Planning guidance is clear (Protection of employment land) but its application is inconsistent, so applicants may not be sure that they need to market their sites for both freehold and leasehold, with fair market prices.

We could review this positively - where a site needs to be market tested, we could look to a simple portal as part of ‘pre-application’ planning. Site owners could list their site, upload images, floor plans, descriptions and rates - free of charge - and interested parties could subscribe to get notifications.

This way we could achieve a fairer system that achieves its desired outcomes;

• Costs are reduced on applicants ‘advertising their sites’
• Planning can have greater confidence that a site was correctly marketed, ensuring more consistent and faster decision making

and most importantly, sites can be genuinely retained in employment land where there is demand.

Digital has a significant role to play if we are to curb or even cut total Government expenditure. We need the ability to deliver small and targeted projects across Government that automate repetitive tasks, and drive more proactive work.

We need the skills in Government to deliver digital change

When Assistant Chief Minister with Responsibility for Digital Services, I pushed to grow internal talent to build deliver this, in particular, I wanted to see a dedicated team that could work across Government, unrestrained by day-to-day maintenance.

The current Technology Strategy lays some foundations including an academy for training and AI pilots, but to deliver this, Digital Services needs capacity and a mandate to build new services in-house, to reduce the cost of the public service, and improve the quality of delivery.

Digital must not replace the in-person and paper side of Government

With all that said, you might think I want to stop in-person services, and remove paper forms. In fact, its the opposite. I believe our Government has a duty to serve its islanders how best suits them.

I’ve often found it more reassuring to call a department or pop in to ask a question, that just read a webpage. As we deliver streamlined processes, we must retain the choice for the islander. For example, we should build digital forms that can be exported to a printed form, and have the processes in place to ensure that Government can provide and receive these on request.

Our hospitality and night-life scene is changing to reflect changing societal expectations. One stark example of this is the closure of a number of night clubs.

In the States Assembly this year, we approved a new Alcohol Licensing Law to replace the 1974 Law that has been in operation for over 50 years.

One of the main features of this new law is to simplify categories and allow for policy making by the States Assembly and not the Licensing Assembly. When the law was presented, few tangible examples were presented as to how this could enable a more vibrant hospitality scene, so we must ensure it actually delivers on its aims.

One area we should investigate is providing more venues greater flexibility on opening hours. Many islanders and visitors would enjoy staying later in our pubs, but the old law restricted their closure to 11pm, forcing those looking to stay out to nightclubs. We could extend pub opening hours where it won’t cause undue nuisance on neighbours, for example pubs around the Weighbridge like the Lamplighter could stay open until midnight.

We have to be realistic with what the States and Government can do to influence the costs bourne by the public and businesses. Many of the factors that drive these are hard to directly or even indirectly control, such as food and energy costs, and the cost of construction (and from this the supply and renovation of housing and economic land).

Despite this, how Government works and serves the public does impact some costs, and where these exist, the policy should be to aim to make sure these are as low as necessary, to remove burdens within control.

The States Owned Entities (SOEs)

We must review the role of the States as shareholder (majority or total) in our SOEs, to ensure they are receiving appropriate steer from Government on our priorities. Whilst they operate with directors and boards, their ultimate responsibility is to serve the shareholder, and we should be direct and clear in what we (the public) want from them.

Examples

1. JT (Jersey Telecom) provide a range of products for telecoms services including phones and broadband. They recently doubled the price of their cheapest PAYG (Pay as you go) fee from £5 per month to £10 per month. Whilst there may be a commercial case, was enough weight given to ensuring a low-cost package remained for islanders?

2. Ports of Jersey have been allowed to increase the fees they charge by RPI+ 1.8%, as set by the JCRA (Jersey Competition Regulatory Authority). Alongside prior rate increases, this has resulted in dramatic increases to services such as moorings. Not all of these are ’luxury’, with the tidal moorings offering many islanders an affordable way to enjoy our natural environment.

3. When it comes to housing, the States of Jersey Development Company (SoJDC) have built, and plan to build, new open-market housing for sale. To date, this has been large apartment developments such as Horizon, College Gardens, and soon to be South Hill. The service charge on development such as Horizon are reported to be considerable amounts and on the upper end of Jersey’s service charge for apartments. We should ensure that Government’s priority is sustainable development, which considers how buildings and homes are affordable to run, not just build and sell.

Good information drives good decision making, and builds trust in Government and the services delivered.

Jersey’s Government and assembly already publish data in various ways, including;

• States Assembly Reports: Reports by ministers or in response to Assembly decisions to request publication, including the Budget and the Annual Report and Accounts
• Government Open Datasets: A set of datasets published on opendata.gov.je, including Stats Jersey data and some other key datasets.
• Government Mapping Data: Various Geospatial datasets hosted to view (but not download) on https://govje.maps.arcgis.com/home/index.html
• Freedom of Information Requests: Data is often published in response to FOIs on an ad-hoc basis.
• Registers: Public Registers such as the Planning portal

These are just some of the sources of data that are published, but accessing and using it isn’t consistent. The costs of running departments, investment in capital, staff numbers, etc are hidden in pages of PDFs, or published in ad-hoc locations.

A Data Strategy that is actually delivered

We need to publish more data, and the data already public in a consistent manner.

To do this, we must develop a Data Strategy that captures the datasets that exist in Government, and build a consistent and maintainable approach to provide this to the public. It will require standards to be adopted and enforced where necessary.

From a technology side, this is our change to make great strides. Building a data-first culture should reduce repetitive work that is done compiling sources, and enable quicker more informed decisions.

Data to how the Government operates will build trust, and a unified and simple to access place to find can gain civic engagement.

Will it make a difference?

I’m confident that if we adopt a data-first approach to Government, the opportunities above will be realised. My free web service, digitalStates.je, has digitised all speeches in the Assembly, and tagged these to the States Member that said it. I am seeing daily use from islanders now using this data - enabling them to find out about their politicians and take a bigger part in political awareness.

I believe that Jersey should financially plan and prepare for the future. This means saving now and investing in our long term funds to be a stronger more resilient island. We promote saving in our private lives but then seem not to follow this in Government.

We must also not use these funds to cover shortfalls in today’s spending, or extend our spending appetite beyond our means.

The Social Security Funds

Our Social Security funds secure the ability to pay pensions and certain benefits in to the future. The Social Security Fund maintains day-to-day income and expenditure, with the Social Security Reserve Fund preparing for the future.

The funds are reviewed for the sustainability, both in Government and by UK Actuaries. At the last full review in 2023, the Reserve Fund was predicted to be exhausted in around 2081. Whilst the mood of some is that this is a good position, once the Reserve Fund runs out, all outgoing Social Security costs will need to be bourne by incomings, or other funds.

This is why moves to reduce the funding of these is a short-sighted move. In both 2024 and 2025, the Government Budgets’ reduced payments in to the funds from tax revenue, to fund day-to-day expenditure, including ‘desirable’ new spends.

In some years, this reduction is almost £100 million, with £50 million of reductions in 2027 - 2029.

The result is not good for our long term fund balance. The UK Actuaries have confirmed this reduction will mean the Reserve Fund is forecast to be exhausted 10 years sooner, now in 2072. (Link to UK Publication)

What’s worse? The £50 million is now committed spend and there is no identified source of funding beyond 2029.

We must reinstate the full States Grant to the Social Security Fund.

The Strategic Reserve Fund

The Fiscal Policy Panel consistently reports we should maintain a Strategic Reserve at around 60% of our GDP, yet in recent years we have only drawn money out of the fund, for example for the Hospital at Overdale.

I accept that it is unlikely we will have a meaningful path to 60% of GDP, however that does not mean we should not try to fund add to this fund.

Recent States debates have leant on the fund as a ’last resort’ if the books can’t be balanced. We must be more diligent in securing our funding.

“Isn’t St. Helier so much prettier than St. Peter Port?”

The above is a line I don’t expect many people have either said or heard. In fact, the feeling of arriving in to Jersey to be confronted by some of our recent developments leads many locals and visitors alike to possibly think ’they’ve made a pigs ear of it’ - and they may be right.

It can be easy to think that ensuring new development integrates with a defined or chosen ‘character’ holds back progress - but thoughtful and respectful design is shown to improve the success, appeal and vitality of a place.

Jersey has had several vernaculars and styles over the centuries, with our farm buildings adopting a unique style and size different to those in other jurisdictions - our town (having mostly grown and been rebuilt in the 1800s) demonstrating a particular rhythm, and our coastline having a range of ribbon development.

We have, however, allowed plenty of development that has damaged the character of the island. Bland white glass boxes, enclosed and gated designs - and completely out-of-place and skyline ruining schemes such as the Horizon flats.

It’s not too late

It would be easy to say ‘The damage has been done’ but there is still so much that is ‘pretty’ and characterful in Jersey - that enriches our experience as islanders of our home.

As such, we must ‘double down’ on good design, in a positive way. Creating new architecture that respects what we have and is at a human scale can be our strength.

There are already some guides to steer development, such as the St Helier Urban Character Appraisal and the Jersey Integrated Landscape and Seascape Character Assessment (ILSCA), but we need clearer and firmed policies and directions to ensure clarity for those proposing development.

We should revisit height guidance and clarify this in absolute terms, not number of floors (that has led to criticism from Planning inspectors for its ambiguity), and work on the concept of ‘conservation areas’ that can enable location specific guidance.

We must also ensure that greater protection is given to ensuring true greenery is protected. This includes the gaps between sites staying sufficiently open where they back on to escarpments, and that sites which are mostly nature or green, even in the built up area, have more consideration to their retention as open space.

Lastly, I want to stress that greater care for protecting our character doesn’t stop architectural progress. Across the world, brilliant schemes blend old and new. There is a place for floor to ceiling glass, new materials and flat roofs, but these are delivered best when they respect and integrate with what is around them, and especially when these new features are retained at the human scale that most development in Jersey still retains.

Jersey’s public registry is over four hundred years old and sits within the Court system, not ministerial Government.

Unlike the UK and other jurisdictions, Jersey doesn’t have a land registry per-say. The authoritative register of the ownership is through the contract.

Our current approach is well understood and works, but in an increasingly digital world, the move to a Land Registry or more model title based system would bring benefits.

I consider that we should explore the reform of our current system, but we must recognise the scale of the task.

We should explore options such as introducing a ‘Cadastral Map’ that records each land parcel and boundary, but for Jersey, I believe the best way will be a phased and considered approach, retaining ownership of the registry within the courts.

We may choose to move only as and when each property is transacted, but work must start now on the next steps to take.

The Jersey Legal Information Board (JLIB) has a key role in driving courts modernisation, but should define the start of this project with Law Society and an appointed Minister as a Ministerial lead.

The range of employment options in Jersey is one thing cited as a reason many don’t return. Jersey is lucky to maintain a strong and financially successful Finance industry, but we don’t have the same diversity in jobs as other areas.

This is tricky for Government to solve, but addressing employment opportunities is part of a wider theme of economic diversity and variety.

There are things we can do, both to help grow industries that provide job opportunities, and to encourage more islanders to pursue careers in sectors outside finance.

Promote what we have

Despite our finance focus, there are roles across a range of sectors in Jersey, and identifying and promoting these is important. One strength we have is that our Government provides all manner of services, and we see creativity in promoting less common jobs (a particular favourite of mine is the promotion of pumping station engineers with black and white banners - at or on top of pumping stations!). Not everyone appreciates or even knows of the range of careers on island.

We should work with businesses to encourage them to recruit and expand locally, rather than branch offshore for most of their work.

We must also continue to promote and work to make Jersey an attractive and successful digital jurisdiction. Digital careers can be creative, flexible and high-earning. We must listen to those businesses on island as to what will make Jersey a great place to stay and grow - with some of the changes being tax agreements with other countries.

Supporting new entrants

Jersey has a rich history of farming, and whilst we’ve lost most family and small farms, there is a clear demand by new entrants to establish and grow. The number of smallholders is increasing year on year, and we must make sure our legislation and regulation enable some of these to transition to mid-scale farmers, who might focus on specific crops, or cater to the local food market.

There are clearly obstacles in the way. Land access and ownership remains a challenge, access to buildings and capital are tricky, as are routes to distribution (despite the calls for more local food). We can build on the Rural Economic Framework 2022, and the recent recapitalisation of the Agricultural Loans Fund, but we also must address the structural challenges stopping new entrants starting or scaling.

In the visitor economy, there is positive investment in new and refreshed stock, but given the capital amounts required, it is hard to see how new ‘younger’ entrants may own and operate small establishments. I believe there is still demand for these, and so whilst tricky to consider, we must look at this sector.

We also need a culture change

What we also need in the island is a cultural shift in mindset towards careers. The focus on Finance, and the salaries that come with it, have led to an element of pushing islanders to Finance as a ’true’ career.

This has to change.

We must treat all trades and sectors of our economy as true careers. They are all essential to create a balanced and thriving economy. This cannot be achieved by 49 states members. It requires the whole island to support and cherish our entire economy.