Paul Montague

Motion put to the States: SHOULD PROPOSITION 1 AND PROPOSITION 2 CARRY 3 (a) To agree that the Committee for Housing shall have the right of first refusal over the future use of the land at Lukis House, Swissville and Garden Hill for the delivery of Affordable Housing and mixed tenure housing, with such use to be given priority over alternative uses of the sites, subject to the Committee for Housing confirming the suitability and viability of the land for housing development; (b) To direct the Committee for Housing, in consultation with the Policy & Resources Committee, to identify the land required for housing development at these sites and undertake an outline viability assessment in order to identify preferred development strategies; (c) To direct the Committee for Housing to confirm its intentions for the use of such land no later than 31 December 2028 or 18 months before the planned opening of the new Children's Hub, whichever is earlier; (d) To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to reserve the land identified by the Committee for Housing under sub-paragraph 3(b) for housing purposes and, subject to any necessary statutory and property approvals, to make the land available for housing development following its vacation by the existing Health and Social Care users; (e) To direct the Policy & Resources Committee, not to allocate or commit any of the land at Lukis House, Swissville or Garden Hill to alternative uses until the Committee for Housing has had the opportunity to exercise its right of first refusal under sub-paragraph 3(a) unless the Committee for Housing has failed to confirm its intentions within the timeline specified in sub-paragraph 3(c).

Voting Pour delivers this

Gives Housing first refusal on States-owned sites (Lukis House, Swissville, Garden Hill) for affordable housing, which uses States land for housing.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To insert an additional proposition as follows: “SHOULD PROPOSITION 1 AND PROPOSITION 2 CARRY 3 (a) To agree that the Committee for Housing shall have the right of first refusal over the future use of the land at Lukis House, Swissville and Garden Hill for the delivery of Affordable Housing and mixed tenure housing, with such use to be given priority over alternative uses of the sites, subject to the Committee for Housing confirming the suitability and viability of the land for housing development; (b) To direct the Committee for Housing, in consultation with the Policy & Resources Committee, to identify the land required for housing development at these sites and undertake an outline viability assessment in order to identify preferred development strategies; (c) To direct the Committee for Housing to confirm its intentions for the use of such land no later than 31 December 2028 or 18 months before the planned opening of the new Children's Hub, whichever is earlier; (d) To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to reserve the land identified by the Committee for Housing under sub-paragraph 3(b) for housing purposes and, subject to any necessary statutory and property approvals, to make the land available for housing development following its vacation by the existing Health and Social Care users; (e) To direct the Policy & Resources Committee, not to allocate or commit any of the land at Lukis House, Swissville or Garden Hill to alternative uses until the Committee for Housing has had the opportunity to exercise its right of first refusal under sub-paragraph 3(a) unless the Committee for Housing has failed to confirm its intentions within the timeline specified in sub-paragraph 3(c).”

Voting Pour delivers this

Amendment giving Housing first refusal over States-owned land for affordable and mixed-tenure housing.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To direct the Policy & Resources Committee and the Committee for Housing to take all such steps as are necessary to ensure that the States are provided with the opportunity to consider in the 2028 Budget options to introduce a tax free Guernsey Property Savings Account (GPSA) to incentivise and better enable savings by first-time buyers for the purposes of buying a home in Guernsey or Alderney. (inserted by A55)

Voting Pour delivers this

Directs options for a tax-free Property Savings Account to help people save to buy, such as first-time buyers.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To insert a new proposition: “1a.To direct the Policy & Resources Committee working with the Committee for Housing, as part of the Guernsey Housing Plan, to consider changes or alternatives to Mortgage Interest Relief, including other forms of tax relief, to better assist first time buyers and homeowners in greater need of financial support; and to revert to the States with recommendations no later than the 2027 Budget Report.”.

Voting Pour delivers this

Directs work on alternatives to mortgage interest relief to better assist first-time buyers, which directly supports first-time buyers.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: 1a. To direct the Policy & Resources Committee working with the Committee for Housing, as part of the Guernsey Housing Plan, to consider changes or alternatives to Mortgage Interest Relief, including other forms of tax relief, to better assist first time buyers and homeowners in greater need of financial support; and to revert to the States with recommendations no later than the 2027 Budget Report.

Voting Pour delivers this

Directs P&R and Housing to consider tax-relief changes to assist first-time buyers within the Housing Plan.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: SHOULD PROPOSITION 1 AND PROPOSITION 2 CARRY 3 (a) To agree that the Committee for Housing shall have the right of first refusal over the future use of the land at Lukis House, Swissville and Garden Hill for the delivery of Affordable Housing and mixed tenure housing, with such use to be given priority over alternative uses of the sites, subject to the Committee for Housing confirming the suitability and viability of the land for housing development; (b) To direct the Committee for Housing, in consultation with the Policy & Resources Committee, to identify the land required for housing development at these sites and undertake an outline viability assessment in order to identify preferred development strategies; (c) To direct the Committee for Housing to confirm its intentions for the use of such land no later than 31 December 2028 or 18 months before the planned opening of the new Children's Hub, whichever is earlier; (d) To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to reserve the land identified by the Committee for Housing under sub-paragraph 3(b) for housing purposes and, subject to any necessary statutory and property approvals, to make the land available for housing development following its vacation by the existing Health and Social Care users; (e) To direct the Policy & Resources Committee, not to allocate or commit any of the land at Lukis House, Swissville or Garden Hill to alternative uses until the Committee for Housing has had the opportunity to exercise its right of first refusal under sub-paragraph 3(a) unless the Committee for Housing has failed to confirm its intentions within the timeline specified in sub-paragraph 3(c).

Voting Pour delivers this

Reserves States land for affordable and mixed-tenure housing, which serves key workers and young families.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To insert an additional proposition as follows: “SHOULD PROPOSITION 1 AND PROPOSITION 2 CARRY 3 (a) To agree that the Committee for Housing shall have the right of first refusal over the future use of the land at Lukis House, Swissville and Garden Hill for the delivery of Affordable Housing and mixed tenure housing, with such use to be given priority over alternative uses of the sites, subject to the Committee for Housing confirming the suitability and viability of the land for housing development; (b) To direct the Committee for Housing, in consultation with the Policy & Resources Committee, to identify the land required for housing development at these sites and undertake an outline viability assessment in order to identify preferred development strategies; (c) To direct the Committee for Housing to confirm its intentions for the use of such land no later than 31 December 2028 or 18 months before the planned opening of the new Children's Hub, whichever is earlier; (d) To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to reserve the land identified by the Committee for Housing under sub-paragraph 3(b) for housing purposes and, subject to any necessary statutory and property approvals, to make the land available for housing development following its vacation by the existing Health and Social Care users; (e) To direct the Policy & Resources Committee, not to allocate or commit any of the land at Lukis House, Swissville or Garden Hill to alternative uses until the Committee for Housing has had the opportunity to exercise its right of first refusal under sub-paragraph 3(a) unless the Committee for Housing has failed to confirm its intentions within the timeline specified in sub-paragraph 3(c).”

Voting Pour delivers this

Prioritises affordable housing use of States land, which helps key workers and young families.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: Whether, after consideration of the Policy Letter entitled ‘Children’s Service Hub’, dated 11thSeptember 2026, they are of the opinion: 1. To agree that the Committee for Health & Social Care should progress plans to refurbish and extend Raymond Falla House to deliver a Children’s Services Hub and, to the extent that any direction is required, to direct them accordingly.

Voting Pour delivers this

Progresses a Children's Services Hub, which supports early help for vulnerable children and families.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: 2. To authorise the Policy & Resources Committee, following its consideration and approval of the Full Business Case, to increase the existing capital vote for the delivery of a Children’s Services Hub to a maximum of £22 million, and to approve the release of such funding of up to that amount, from the General Revenue Reserve.

Voting Pour delivers this

Funds the Children's Services Hub, which supports early support for vulnerable children.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: Whether, after consideration of the Policy Letter ''Tax Reform 2026'' dated 8 June 2026, they are of the opinion: 1. To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to implement the package of tax reforms to make Guernsey and Alderney more financially sustainable as set out in sections 9 and 10 with the rates and thresholds as described in Appendix 7, save that, in relation to GST, food produced or grown by small independent suppliers is to be taxed at a rate of 0% and not at 3%, and with the following clarifications, and subject to the following: A) the Policy & Resources Committee, working with the Committee for Employment & Social Security, shall not bring GST into operation unless: i. the associated personal income tax and social security contribution mitigations are in force and operational, and are being applied through the relevant deduction, collection and assessment arrangements, before GST becomes chargeable; ii. the approved GST-related increases in the States Pension, income support and other benefits have taken effect, with payments at the increased rates commencing before GST becomes chargeable; and iii. the Essential Costs Relief Payment arrangements are in force and operational; for the purpose of this Proposition, an intention to apply relief retrospectively, make compensatory payments later or complete the necessary systems after GST has commenced shall not constitute implementation of the Mitigation Measures; b) the Policy & Resources Committee: i. shall defer the commencement of GST where any of the conditions in this Proposition 1(a) cannot be met; ii. shall revise the implementation timetable so that those conditions are met, including any necessary alignment with the commencement of a tax or contribution year; and iii. shall report promptly to the States on the reason for the delay, its financial implications and the revised timetable; c) no authority otherwise given under this item shall permit GST to commence in advance of compliance with those conditions; d) the Policy & Resources Committee and the Committee for Employment & Social Security, before any instrument bringing GST into operation is made or submitted for approval, shall publish a joint implementation assurance report: i. identifying each Mitigation Measure, its commencement date and the date from which its financial effect will be delivered; ii. setting out the evidence that the necessary legislation, staffing, systems, payroll interfaces, assessment arrangements and payment processes are ready to deliver the measures in accordance with this Proposition; and iii. identifying any outstanding implementation risks and explaining how those risks have been addressed, including the arrangements for receiving and determining Essential Costs Relief Payment Claims; e) where compliance depends upon an event occurring after publication of that report, the Committees shall publish confirmation that the event has occurred before GST becomes chargeable, if the conditions cannot be met, the terms under this proposition at 1(b) shall apply notwithstanding any commencement date previously appointed; f) the legislation implementing GST shall give effect to these commencement conditions and shall not confer power to dispense with them by administrative decision; and

Voting Pour delivers this

Adopts the tax reform package including a GST, which diversifies the tax base beyond income tax; Pour delivers the diversification.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To delete propositions 1, 2 and 3 and to substitute therefor: “1. To agree that the individual standard rate for income tax should be 22% for 2027 and 2028 and at 20% for 2029 and onwards. 2. To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to investigate an increase to the Maximum liability on income for non-Guernsey sources (including Guernsey bank interest and income derived from Guernsey exempt investment schemes, which are non-resident for Guernsey tax purposes) and the maximum liability – worldwide income and to report back to the States via the Annual Budget for 2028.”.

Voting Contre delivers this

Substitutes a higher income tax rate for the GST package, which relies on income tax; opposing it advances the promise.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: In Proposition 1 after “Appendix 7” insert the following: “, subject to replacing the proposed goods and services tax with an increase in the standard rate of income tax from 20 percent to a single rate at 22 percent, which increase is to be done as soon as practicable”.

Voting Contre delivers this

Replaces GST with an income tax rise to 22%, the single-source reliance the promise rejects; opposing it advances the promise.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To delete all propositions and insert: 1. To agree that consideration of the proposed Goods and Services Tax and the associated Income Tax and Social Security contribution reforms detailed in the Policy Letter shall be deferred until a further review of revenue-generation options has been conducted. 2. To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to investigate the introduction of a tax on insurance premiums. 3. To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to return to the States no later than March 2027 with its findings and proposals for the introduction of a tax on insurance premiums, alongside and as an alternative to the proposals for GST detailed in this Policy Letter.

Voting Contre delivers this

Defers GST and the reforms pending further review; opposing it keeps diversification on track.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To substitute in Proposition 1 the word “and” for the full stop and to insert, immediately after Proposition 1, the following additional Proposition: “1A. To direct, notwithstanding Proposition 1, the Policy & Resources Committee: a) not to continue with “the Reserved Measures”, so defined as: i. the introduction of a goods and services tax (“GST”) ii. the proposed International Services Entity arrangements insofar as those arrangements are dependent upon, or form part of, the introduction of GST; and iii. any reductions or restructuring of personal income tax, any associated payments, allowances or mitigations, which are intended to offset or redistribute the effects of GST; b) to continue with the development and implementation of the remainder of the tax reform package provided those measures are capable of proceeding independently of the Reserved Measures; c) to report to the States by October 2027 with regard to: i. the receipts from Pillar Two arrangements and the best available estimate of the recurring annual revenues arising from them; ii. recurring expenditure reductions and efficiencies which have been implemented, including but not limited to progress against the approximate £20 million assumption incorporated within the financial forecasts; iii. an updated assessment of the States’ financial position, including the General Revenue Reserve, investment performance, infrastructure requirements, financing commitments and debt-repayment obligations; iv. updated demographic, workforce and public service demand projections; v. progress in addressing the outstanding operational, staffing, systems and administrative issues within the Revenue Services, together with an assessment of its readiness to implement and administer any additional taxes; vi. updated implementation and administration costs associated with the Reserved Measures, including expenditure already incurred and any avoidable, unavoidable or abortive costs; and that the original propositions of this report shall not seek approval for the Reserved Measures; d) put not before the States any proposals in relations to the Reserved Measures until after the report outlined in 1A(c) has been considered by the States.”.

Voting Contre delivers this

Directs P&R not to continue with the reserved measures including GST; opposing it keeps diversification.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To sursis the propositions until such time that the Chief Financial Officer has provided the States with a comprehensive report on the States financial position or 31st July 2028, whichever is earlier and to direct the Policy & Resources Committee to return the States with a tax reform package that does not include a goods and services tax.

Voting Contre delivers this

Sursis requiring a tax reform package without GST; opposing it keeps broadened-base reform moving.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: At the end of Proposition 1 insert the words “, subject to excluding the following: “a) the introduction of a goods and services tax; b) the changes to social security contributions; c) the introduction of new, and changes to, transport taxes”.

Voting Contre delivers this

Would exclude GST and other new taxes from the package; opposing it keeps tax base diversification.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To delete all propositions and to substitute therefor: “1.To agree a goods and services tax shall not be introduced, and: (i) to rescind Resolution I. 1B. and Resolution I. 1C. of Billet d’Etat No. XIX dated 14th October, 2024 made on 8th November 2024; and (ii) to direct the Policy & Resources Committee to cease all preparations for the introduction of any goods and services tax.”.

Voting Contre delivers this

Would rule out GST; opposing it keeps the tax base diversification option alive.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To delete Propositions 1 to 3 and substitute therefor: “1.To agree that neither the proposed Goods and Services Tax nor the associated Income Tax and Social Security contribution reforms detailed in the Policy Letter shall be introduced as part of the Tax Reform Programme. 2.To agree that the proposed Transport Taxes shall proceed as set out in this Policy Letter at Paragraph 9.7 and as more specifically described therein. 3.To agree that the proposed Corporate Tax amendments shall proceed as set out in Paragraph 9.21 of this Policy Letter and as more specifically described therein, excepting that at the third bullet point of paragraph 9.21, the term “ISE” shall be substituted with “Corporate Levy” (and this substitution shall take effect wherever relevant). 4.To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to develop and bring before the States proposals, for implementation on the same timetable as the tax measures proposed in this Policy Letter where reasonably practicable, for the introduction of a Corporate Levy payable by registered Guernsey companies, having regard to the work previously undertaken by the Tax Review Sub-Committee, and including consideration of whether such levy should comprise: a fixed annual levy payable by each registered company; a levy differentiated according to the size or scale of the undertaking, including consideration of whether existing company classifications may provide an appropriate and proportionate basis for differentiation; or such other structure as the Committee considers best achieves the objectives of fairness, administrative simplicity and efficient revenue collection. 5.To direct the Committee for Economic Development, in consultation with the Policy & Resources Committee, to develop and bring before the States, on the same timetable where reasonably practicable, proposals for the introduction of a Visitor Levy in accordance with the extant States Resolution, with all revenues arising from such levy to be paid into the General Revenue Account and not hypothecated for expenditure by any particular Committee or industry sector. 6.To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to revise the implementation programme and associated implementation budget for Tax Reform to reflect the removal of the proposed Goods and Services Tax and associated Income Tax and Social Security contribution reforms, including the consequential reduction in implementation cost, implementation activity, systems development, staffing and administrative requirements. 7. To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to return to the States with: 1. a revised implementation programme; 2. a revised implementation budget; 3. revised estimates of one-off implementation costs; 4. revised estimates of ongoing administration costs; 5. revised estimates of annual recurring revenues; and 6. revised staffing assumptions, reflecting the alternative package approved under this Proposition within a period that results in the States being capable of meeting the proposed implementation timetable as proposed within the Policy Letter. 8.To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to return to the States with an assurance review in 2030 as set out in section 12 of the Policy Letter, the scope of which shall be adjusted, where necessary, to take account of the removal of GST and Social Security measures from the package under these proposals and the application of those measures considered herein.”.

Voting Contre delivers this

Would remove GST and the associated reforms from the package; opposing it keeps the broader tax base.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: b. (i) the Goods & Services Tax should be applied at a standard rate of 5%, andthat all foodstuffs should be subject to the tax at the standard rate; AND (ii)an Essentials Cost Relief Payment scheme should be implemented as outlined in Section 4, with the fixed payment set provisionally (subject to review as set out below) at £520 a year for a single adult or £860 a year for a couple, reflecting the estimated annual GST incurred by a household on Income Support; and that the responsibility and administering of this payment should be added to the mandate of the Committee for Employment & Social Security; and that the payment should be increased each January in line with Income Support rates, the value of the payment being fully reviewed in line with the minimum income standard whenever that exercise is repeated;

Voting Pour delivers this

Agrees in principle a 5% GST, which broadens the tax base beyond income tax.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To delete all propositions and to substitute therefor: “1. To agree a goods and services tax shall not be introduced, and: (i) to rescind Resolution I. 1B. and Resolution I. 1C. of Billet d’Etat No. XIX dated 14th October, 2024 made on 8th November 2024; and (ii) to direct the Policy & Resources Committee to cease all preparations for the introduction of any goods and services tax.”. View this proposition's information page on gov.gg

Voting Contre delivers this

Would rule out GST and halt work on it, so diversification would fall back on income tax; opposing it advances the promise.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: Whether, after consideration of the Policy Letter ''Tax Reform 2026'' dated 8 June 2026, they are of the opinion: 1. To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to implement the package of tax reforms to make Guernsey and Alderney more financially sustainable as set out in sections 9 and 10 with the rates and thresholds as described in Appendix 7, save that, in relation to GST, food produced or grown by small independent suppliers is to be taxed at a rate of 0% and not at 3%, and with the following clarifications, and subject to the following: A) the Policy & Resources Committee, working with the Committee for Employment & Social Security, shall not bring GST into operation unless: i. the associated personal income tax and social security contribution mitigations are in force and operational, and are being applied through the relevant deduction, collection and assessment arrangements, before GST becomes chargeable; ii. the approved GST-related increases in the States Pension, income support and other benefits have taken effect, with payments at the increased rates commencing before GST becomes chargeable; and iii. the Essential Costs Relief Payment arrangements are in force and operational; for the purpose of this Proposition, an intention to apply relief retrospectively, make compensatory payments later or complete the necessary systems after GST has commenced shall not constitute implementation of the Mitigation Measures; b) the Policy & Resources Committee: i. shall defer the commencement of GST where any of the conditions in this Proposition 1(a) cannot be met; ii. shall revise the implementation timetable so that those conditions are met, including any necessary alignment with the commencement of a tax or contribution year; and iii. shall report promptly to the States on the reason for the delay, its financial implications and the revised timetable; c) no authority otherwise given under this item shall permit GST to commence in advance of compliance with those conditions; d) the Policy & Resources Committee and the Committee for Employment & Social Security, before any instrument bringing GST into operation is made or submitted for approval, shall publish a joint implementation assurance report: i. identifying each Mitigation Measure, its commencement date and the date from which its financial effect will be delivered; ii. setting out the evidence that the necessary legislation, staffing, systems, payroll interfaces, assessment arrangements and payment processes are ready to deliver the measures in accordance with this Proposition; and iii. identifying any outstanding implementation risks and explaining how those risks have been addressed, including the arrangements for receiving and determining Essential Costs Relief Payment Claims; e) where compliance depends upon an event occurring after publication of that report, the Committees shall publish confirmation that the event has occurred before GST becomes chargeable, if the conditions cannot be met, the terms under this proposition at 1(b) shall apply notwithstanding any commencement date previously appointed; f) the legislation implementing GST shall give effect to these commencement conditions and shall not confer power to dispense with them by administrative decision; and

Voting Contre delivers this

Implements the GST package; if wider public support is absent, supporting it breaches the 'cannot be implemented without wider support' condition, though that fact is external to the vote.

Why this counts against the promise: Deputy Paul Montague promised voters he would only support GST+ if it had wider public support and formed part of a broader, fairer tax strategy, yet on 2 October 2026 he voted Pour on the motion to implement the Tax Reform 2026 package including GST, a vote that works against delivering that conditional commitment.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To delete the propositions and substitute therefor: “1. To direct the States Assembly and Constitution Committee to return to the States at its meeting on 17th March 2027 with arrangements for the holding (under the provisions of the relevant legislation) of a referendum on Tax reform. 2. To direct the Committee to agree that the question to be put to the electorate in the referendum shall be in a binary form along the following lines: “Do you support the introduction of the tax reform package proposed by the Policy & Resources Committee? Yes or No.”.”.

Voting Pour delivers this

A referendum on tax reform directly tests the public-support condition; supporting it honours the promise.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise required public support before implementing GST+, and while a referendum could be one way to establish that, the deputy could reasonably vote against this specific referendum mechanism—on grounds of question design, timing, or preferring a different form of public consultation—while still honestly holding to the condition that wider public support must be demonstrated.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To delete the propositions and substitute therefor: 1. To direct the States Assembly and Constitution Committee to return to the States at its meeting on 21st October 2026 with arrangements for the holding (under the provisions of the relevant legislation) of a referendum on Tax reform. 2. To direct the Committee to agree that the question to be put to the electorate in the referendum shall be in a binary form along the following lines: “Do you support the introduction of a GST (goods and services tax)? Yes or No.”.

Voting Contre delivers this

A referendum on tax reform directly tests whether GST has wider public support; supporting it honours the condition.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: Recognising the importance of a fit-for-purpose, accountable and high-performing leadership within the public service and supporting structures capable of delivering the Government Work Plan, and to enable political committees to exercise challenge, control and vision, to agree to mandate the Chief Executive, drawing on external expertise where appropriate, to lead a programme of organisational reform as a priority to deliver performance, culture and capability improvements across the public service, and to direct the publication of clear terms of reference, approved by the Policy & Resources Committee, and to further direct the Policy & Resources Committee to resource the programme as necessary to achieve these outcomes, reporting regularly on its progress to the States.

Voting Pour delivers this

Mandates the Chief Executive to build a high-performing public service able to deliver the Work Plan; voting Pour backs the Chief Executive's reform leadership.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To insert a new proposition, as follows: “Recognising the importance of a fit-for-purpose, accountable and high-performing leadership within the public service and supporting structures capable of delivering the Government Work Plan, and to enable political committees to exercise challenge, control and vision, to agree to mandate the Chief Executive, drawing on external expertise where appropriate, to lead a programme of organisational reform as a priority to deliver performance, culture and capability improvements across the public service, and to direct the publication of clear terms of reference, approved by the Policy & Resources Committee, and to further direct the Policy & Resources Committee to resource the programme as necessary to achieve these outcomes, reporting regularly on its progress to the States.”

Voting Pour delivers this

The same proposition, moved as an amendment, mandating the Chief Executive to lead public service capability and reform; Pour supports it.

Official voting record →