Sarah Hansmann Rouxel

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

Directing consideration of alternatives to Mortgage Interest Relief to better assist first-time buyers advances the promise to create homeownership pathways including partial ownership and rent-to-buy schemes.

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

Directing the P&R and Housing Committees to consider tax relief changes to assist first-time buyers as part of the Housing Plan directly advances the homeownership pathways promise.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: 16. To agree that the project for site clearance at Leale's Yard is added as a delivery project in the current Major Projects Portfolio.

Voting Pour delivers this

Adding the Leale's Yard site clearance project to the Major Projects Portfolio delivery stage advances the promise to speed affordable housing development by unlocking sites.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: 16. To agree that the project for site clearance at Leale's Yard is added as a delivery project in the current Major Projects Portfolio.

Voting Pour delivers this

Adding Leale's Yard site clearance to the Major Projects Portfolio directly advances use of States-owned land for housing development, as promised.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: The States are asked to decide:- Whether they are of the opinion to approve the draft Ordinance entitled ''The Education (Guernsey) (Amendment) Law, 2025 (Commencement) Ordinance, 2026'' and to direct that the same shall have effect as an Ordinance of the States.

Voting Pour delivers this

Bringing the Education (Guernsey) (Amendment) Law 2025 into commencement directly delivers the promise to reform the Education Law for genuine accountability.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: The States are asked to decide:- Whether they are of the opinion to approve the draft Ordinance entitled ''The Education (Governance Boards) (Amendment) Ordinance, 2026'' and to direct that the same shall have effect as an Ordinance of the States.

Voting Pour delivers this

Approving the Education (Governance Boards) (Amendment) Ordinance 2026 advances governance reform in schools, bearing on the promise to reform education law for genuine accountability.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To insert immediately after “of the States” the following: “subject to the following amendment: “To delete Clause 4(7) and replace with the following Clause: “4 (7)The Director of Education (or a person nominated by the Director of Education for this purpose) may attend one meeting of each governance board each academic year, or more frequently only at the – invitation of that governance board, or the direction of the Committee, where the Committee has reasonable grounds to believe that there has been a material failure in governance, safeguarding, financial management, or compliance with applicable law or policy, and has recorded such grounds in writing.".””.

Voting Pour delivers this

This amendment to the Education (Governance Boards) Ordinance shaped the governance framework, bearing on the promise for genuine accountability in the education system.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: Immediately after ""The Education (Governance Boards) Ordinance, 2025"", insert ", subject to the amendments below" and at the end of the proposition, insert the following: "Amendments: In section 1 - in the section heading for "Constitution" substitute "Purpose and constitution", and after subsection (1), insert – "(1A)The purpose of the governance board of a relevant educational establishment is to – (a)contribute to and promote the ethos and strategic direction of the establishment, (b)hold the headteacher and management to account in respect of safeguarding, educational standards, attendance, staff performance and professional development, (c)hold the headteacher and management to account in respect of the use of financial and other resources by the establishment, and (d)facilitate and promote the giving of effective and appropriate communication from parents, staff, learners and the community to the headteacher and management of the establishment.", (c)in subsection (2)(b) for "four" substitute "five", (d)at the end of subsection (2)(d) insert "and", and at the end of subsection (2)(e) for ", and" substitute ".", (e)delete subsection (2)(f), (f)in subsection (3)(b) for "six" substitute "seven", (g)at the end of subsection (3)(d) insert "and", and at the end of subsection (3)(e) for ", and" substitute ".", and (h)delete subsection (3)(f).".

Voting Pour delivers this

Further amendments to the Education (Governance Boards) Ordinance refined accountability structures, directly bearing on the promise to deliver genuine accountability through education reform.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: Whether they are of the opinion to approve the draft Ordinance entitled "The Education (Governance Boards) Ordinance, 2025" and to direct that the same shall have effect as an Ordinance of the States subject to amendments below: In section 1 - in the section heading for "Constitution" substitute "Purpose and constitution", and after subsection (1), insert – "(1A)The purpose of the governance board of a relevant educational establishment is to – (a)contribute to and promote the ethos and strategic direction of the establishment, (b)hold the headteacher and management to account in respect of safeguarding, educational standards, attendance, staff performance and professional development, (c)hold the headteacher and management to account in respect of the use of financial and other resources by the establishment, and (d)facilitate and promote the giving of effective and appropriate communication from parents, staff, learners and the community to the headteacher and management of the establishment.", (c)in subsection (2)(b) for "four" substitute "five", (d)at the end of subsection (2)(d) insert "and", and at the end of subsection (2)(e) for ", and" substitute ".", (e)delete subsection (2)(f), (f)in subsection (3)(b) for "six" substitute "seven", (g)at the end of subsection (3)(d) insert "and", and at the end of subsection (3)(e) for ", and" substitute ".", and (h)delete subsection (3)(f).". To delete Clause 4(7) and replace with the following Clause: “4 (7)The Director of Education (or a person nominated by the Director of Education for this purpose) may attend one meeting of each governance board each academic year, or more frequently only at the – invitation of that governance board, or the direction of the Committee, where the Committee has reasonable grounds to believe that there has been a material failure in governance, safeguarding, financial management, or compliance with applicable law or policy, and has recorded such grounds in writing.

Voting Pour delivers this

Approving the Education (Governance Boards) Ordinance establishes new governance structures in schools, advancing the promise to support the Guernsey Institute and deliver genuine educational accountability.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: Whether they are of the opinion to approve the draft Projet de Loi entitled "The Education (Guernsey) (Amendment) Law, 2025", and to authorise the Bailiff to present a most humble petition to His Majesty praying for His Royal Sanction thereto.

Voting Pour delivers this

Approving the Education (Guernsey) (Amendment) Law 2025 is a direct step to reform the Education Law, which the promise specifically commits to in order to deliver genuine accountability.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To sursis consideration of the Projet de Loi entitled ‘The Education (Guernsey) (Amendment) Law, 2025’ and to direct the Committee for Education, Sport & Culture to return to the States with a revised Projet de Loi which— 1. revises and limits the Committee’s regulation-making powers ensuring that powers in respect of the constitution, powers and functions of Governance Boards vest clearly in the States of Deliberation by Ordinance and that the said regulation-making powers remain in-keeping with the scope envisaged by the Policy Letter, being to permit “operational changes to elements of the governance framework” to be made by the Committee for operational efficacy; and 2. sets out in full the proposed constitutional terms of reference of the Governance Boards, including their objectives, responsibilities and delegated and/or devolved powers, to apply from the commencement of the Law.

Voting Contre delivers this

This sursis would have delayed and potentially diluted the Education Amendment Law, working directly against the promise to reform the Education Law for genuine accountability.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: The States are asked to decide:- Whether they are of the opinion to approve the draft Ordinance entitled ''The Education (Guernsey) (Amendment) Law, 2025 (Commencement) Ordinance, 2026'' and to direct that the same shall have effect as an Ordinance of the States.

Voting Pour delivers this

Commencing the Education Amendment Law advances the governance framework for secondary education, bearing on the promise to build a sustainable model.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To insert an additional proposition as follows: “6. To agree an additional workstream to the ‘Foundations for Our Future’ area of focus (under the ‘A Place to Grow and Succeed’ theme) with the objective of ‘Responding to the Needs of the Island’s Young People’, and to direct the Policy & Resources Committee to support the cross-committee coordination of the upcoming refresh and enhancement of the Children & Young People’s Plan ensuring that it: i) hears and reflects the voice of a wide range of children, young people and young adults via direct consultation; ii) consults with third sector organisations supporting the island’s children, young people and young adults; iii) takes into account existing relevant strategies and plans; and iv) provides the necessary resources to undertake that consultation and to support the production of the enhanced Children & Young People’s Plan for consideration by the States of Deliberation.”.

Voting Pour delivers this

This amendment added a workstream to respond to young people's needs and coordinate education reviews, directly bearing on the promise to build a sustainable secondary education model.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: 6. To agree an additional workstream to the ‘Foundations for Our Future’ area of focus (under the ‘A Place to Grow and Succeed’ theme) with the objective of ‘Responding to the Needs of the Island’s Young People’, and to direct the Policy & Resources Committee to support the cross-committee coordination of the upcoming refresh and enhancement of the Children & Young People’s Plan ensuring that it: i) hears and reflects the voice of a wide range of children, young people and young adults via direct consultation; ii) consults with third sector organisations supporting the island’s children, young people and young adults; iii) takes into account existing relevant strategies and plans; and iv) provides the necessary resources to undertake that consultation and to support the production of the enhanced Children & Young People’s Plan for consideration by the States of Deliberation.

Voting Pour delivers this

Adding a workstream on responding to the needs of young people and supporting cross-committee coordination of upcoming education reviews advances the promise to prioritise student outcomes.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To sursis consideration of the Projet de Loi entitled ‘The Education (Guernsey) (Amendment) Law, 2025’ and to direct the Committee for Education, Sport & Culture to return to the States with a revised Projet de Loi which— 1. revises and limits the Committee’s regulation-making powers ensuring that powers in respect of the constitution, powers and functions of Governance Boards vest clearly in the States of Deliberation by Ordinance and that the said regulation-making powers remain in-keeping with the scope envisaged by the Policy Letter, being to permit “operational changes to elements of the governance framework” to be made by the Committee for operational efficacy; and 2. sets out in full the proposed constitutional terms of reference of the Governance Boards, including their objectives, responsibilities and delegated and/or devolved powers, to apply from the commencement of the Law.

Voting Contre delivers this

This sursis would have delayed education governance reform, working against the promise to build a sustainable secondary education model.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: Whether they are of the opinion to approve the draft Projet de Loi entitled "The Education (Guernsey) (Amendment) Law, 2025", and to authorise the Bailiff to present a most humble petition to His Majesty praying for His Royal Sanction thereto.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Education (Guernsey) (Amendment) Law 2025 reforms education governance structures, which bears on building a sustainable secondary education model with student outcomes prioritised.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: The States are asked to decide:- Whether they are of the opinion to approve the draft Ordinance entitled ''The Education (Guernsey) (Amendment) Law, 2025 (Commencement) Ordinance, 2026'' and to direct that the same shall have effect as an Ordinance of the States.

Voting Pour delivers this

Bringing the Education (Guernsey) (Amendment) Law 2025 into force advances the governance reforms bearing on the promise to plan for a viable school structure with accountability.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: Whether they are of the opinion to approve the draft Projet de Loi entitled "The Education (Guernsey) (Amendment) Law, 2025", and to authorise the Bailiff to present a most humble petition to His Majesty praying for His Royal Sanction thereto.

Voting Pour delivers this

The Education (Guernsey) (Amendment) Law 2025 reforms education governance, which bears on the promise to honestly address education structures and deliver accountability in school planning.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To sursis consideration of the Projet de Loi entitled ‘The Education (Guernsey) (Amendment) Law, 2025’ and to direct the Committee for Education, Sport & Culture to return to the States with a revised Projet de Loi which— 1. revises and limits the Committee’s regulation-making powers ensuring that powers in respect of the constitution, powers and functions of Governance Boards vest clearly in the States of Deliberation by Ordinance and that the said regulation-making powers remain in-keeping with the scope envisaged by the Policy Letter, being to permit “operational changes to elements of the governance framework” to be made by the Committee for operational efficacy; and 2. sets out in full the proposed constitutional terms of reference of the Governance Boards, including their objectives, responsibilities and delegated and/or devolved powers, to apply from the commencement of the Law.

Voting Contre delivers this

This lost sursis would have delayed the Education Amendment Law and required a revised version restricting committee powers, potentially hindering governance reform the promise calls for.

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 Pour delivers this

This amendment would have excluded GST, social security contributions and transport taxes from the reform proposition, directly bearing on the condition against new taxation absent credible government reform.

Why this counts against the promise: Deputy Sarah Hansmann Rouxel promised voters she would support new taxation measures only after trust had been restored and genuine reform delivered, yet on 17 July 2026 she voted Contre on the amendment that would have excluded a goods and services tax, changes to social security contributions, and new transport taxes from consideration, a vote that worked against her stated precondition of credible reform before any new taxation.

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 Pour delivers this

This amendment would have rescinded GST decisions and ceased all GST work, consistent with the promise to not support new taxation before trust and credible reform are established.

Why this counts against the promise: Deputy Sarah Hansmann Rouxel had promised voters she would only support new taxation after trust had been restored and genuine reform delivered, yet on 16 July 2026 she voted Contre on a motion to prevent the introduction of a goods and services tax, a vote that worked against her stated precondition of reform before any new taxation.

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 Pour delivers this

This amendment would have excluded GST, social security changes and transport taxes from the tax reform package, aligning with the conditional promise not to accept new taxation before credible reform.

Why this counts against the promise: Deputy Sarah Hansmann Rouxel had promised voters that she would work to restore trust and drive genuine reform before supporting any new taxation measures, yet on 16 July 2026 she voted Contre on the motion to remove the proposed Goods and Services Tax and associated Income Tax and Social Security contribution reforms from the Tax Reform Programme, a vote that worked against delivering her stated precondition of credible reform before new taxation was introduced.

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 Pour delivers this

This amendment would have directed a referendum on tax reform before proceeding, bearing on the promise's requirement for public legitimacy and credible process before new taxation.

Why this counts against the promise: Deputy Hansmann Rouxel promised voters that any new taxation should only be pursued once trust had been restored and a credible plan was in place, yet on 15 July 2026 she voted Contre on a motion that would have directed a public referendum on GST — voting against giving Islanders a direct say on the taxation question and thereby working against her own stated precondition of building credibility and public trust before advancing tax reform.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To sursis the propositions either until such time that Members of the States have received the following: i) a report from the new Chief Resourcing Officer on the States finances; and ii) evidence that the Revenue Services has resolved its backlog and can demonstrate that it is successfully able to manage its future workflow, or by 19th July 2028, whichever is earlier.

Voting Pour delivers this

The sursis motion would have delayed tax reform until fiscal capacity was demonstrated, which bears on the promise's condition of a credible plan before new taxation.

Why this counts against the promise: Deputy Hansmann Rouxel promised voters she would work to restore trust and drive genuine reform before supporting any new taxation, yet on 15 July 2026 she voted Contre the sursis motion that would have delayed new taxation measures until key financial reforms and administrative competence had been demonstrated, voting against the very preconditions her own manifesto set out.

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 Pour delivers this

This amendment would have stopped all GST work entirely, aligning with the conditional promise to not support new taxation until trust is restored and credible reform is in place; voting Pour would advance the promise's condition.

Why this counts against the promise: Deputy Sarah Hansmann Rouxel promised voters she would not support new taxation until trust had been restored and genuine reform delivered, yet on 26 February 2026 she voted Contre on a motion to prohibit the introduction of a goods and services tax, a vote that works against her stated precondition of credible government and a credible plan before any new taxation is accepted by Islanders.

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 Contre delivers this

This motion adopts GST at 5% as part of tax reform — voting Pour directly advances new taxation, which the promise conditions on prior trust-restoration and credible government reform being achieved first.

Why this counts against the promise: Deputy Sarah Hansmann Rouxel had promised voters that trust must be restored and genuine reform delivered before any new taxation is introduced, yet on 26 February 2026 she voted Pour on the motion to introduce a 5% Goods and Services Tax — a vote that works directly against her stated precondition of credible government and a credible plan before asking Islanders to accept new taxation.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: 22. That, (a) subject to the provisions of the Income Tax (Guernsey) Law, 1975 and to the provisions of this Proposition, the allowances claimable for the Year of Charge 2026 by an individual solely or principally resident in Guernsey by way of relief from income tax at the individual standard rate, shall be the allowances specified in the First Schedule to this proposition; (b) the allowances specified in the First Schedule to this proposition shall only be granted to an individual who has made a claim in accordance with the provisions of the Income Tax (Guernsey) Law, 1975 and who has proved the conditions applicable to such allowances and prescribed in the Second Schedule to this proposition have been fulfilled; (c) ''Family Allowances'' means Family Allowances payable under the Family Allowances (Guernsey) Law, 1950 as amended; and (d) ''the Income Tax (Guernsey) Law, 1975'' means that Law as amended, extended or applied by or under any other enactment and includes, where relevant, any Ordinance, regulation or Resolution of the States made under that Law.

Voting Pour delivers this

This motion sets income tax allowances for 2026, and its level relative to inflation is a direct test of the promise to support raising allowances in line with inflation.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To insert an additional proposition as follows: “To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to publish a report on the progress of the Major Projects Portfolio, including relevant information and metrics on each project’s performance against plan and budget, in a format that is publicly available and easily accessible, no later than 1st July 2026, with updates provided at least every six months thereafter; and to note the Chief Executive shall report on major workstreams underway in the public service as part of an annual Chief Executive’s report.”.

Voting Pour delivers this

Directing publication of Major Projects Portfolio progress in an accessible public format advances the promise for clearer accountability on delivery of key projects.

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

This motion mandates public service leadership reform to deliver the GWP, bearing on the promise for a cohesive government work plan with clear accountability.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: 5. To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to submit to the States this term a mid-term report and an end-of-term report on the progress of the Government Work Plan, including commentary on how delivery of the Plan has: (a) supported or strengthened the Island’s economic capacity and competitiveness; (b) involved trade-offs affecting economic growth, resilience or productivity; and (c) balanced economic considerations alongside other policy objectives in the delivery of super priorities.

Voting Pour delivers this

Directing mid-term and end-of-term progress reports on the Government Work Plan advances accountability for delivery, which is central to this promise.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: 3. To direct the Policy & Resources Committee and each Principal Committee to publish a Committee Work Plan for the term (as set out in section 7).

Voting Pour delivers this

Directing each Principal Committee to publish a Committee Work Plan for the term directly delivers the promise for a cohesive government work plan and clearer deputy accountability for delivery.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: 2. To agree to classify the following workstreams as super priorities for the duration of this political term to deliver sustainable economic growth, and direct the Committees of the States to treat their work contributing to these workstreams as their highest priority: • Decide and deliver tax reform, • Clear and commence site development at Leale’s Yard, • Agree and advance a sustainable health and care system, • Shape and strengthen the focus on early years and families, and • Determine and design future harbour requirements.

Voting Pour delivers this

This motion classifies super-priority workstreams and directs committees to treat them as highest priority, advancing the promise for clearer deputy and committee accountability under the work plan.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: The States are asked to decide: Whether, after consideration of the policy letter entitled ‘Government Work Plan 2026-2029’ dated 16thDecember2025, they are of the opinion: 1) To agree the three government areas of focus – Foundations for our Future, Sustainable Wellbeing, and Island Resilience – and their associated work plans for this political term (illustrated in Appendix I) and direct the Committees of the States to prioritise their resources accordingly.

Voting Pour delivers this

Approving the Government Work Plan 2026–2029 including its workstreams and accountability structures directly advances the promise to push for a cohesive government work plan.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to publish a report on the progress of the Major Projects Portfolio, including relevant information and metrics on each project’s performance against plan and budget, in a format that is publicly available and easily accessible, no later than 1st July 2026, with updates provided at least every six months thereafter; and to note the Chief Executive shall report on major workstreams underway in the public service as part of an annual Chief Executive’s report.

Voting Pour delivers this

This motion directs regular, publicly accessible reporting on Major Projects Portfolio performance, advancing accountability for blocked or delayed projects as promised.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To insert an additional proposition as follows: “6.To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to publish progress of the Government Work Plan in a manner that is publicly available and easily accessible (for example, via a dedicated and regularly updated web page) no later than 1st July 2026 and updated at least every six months thereafter, containing clear, concrete targets, leading indicators, milestones, and both qualitative and quantitative metrics against which progress can be tracked, audited, and measured; and further, to include these specific criteria in the mid-term and end-of-term Government Work Plan reports, ensuring any significant deviations from original priorities are fully explained.”.

Voting Pour delivers this

This lost amendment would have required publicly accessible progress reporting on the GWP at least every six months, directly advancing the promise for clearer accountability for delivery of the plan.

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

Mandating the Chief Executive to ensure accountable public service leadership capable of delivering the GWP advances the promise for a cohesive plan with clear accountability.

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

Mandating the Chief Executive to review and reform the public service structure to support cross-committee delivery directly advances the promise to reduce duplication from siloed committees.

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 motion directs the Chief Executive to review public service structures to ensure accountable and high-performing leadership, bearing on the promise to reform civil service structures and reduce siloed duplication.

Official voting record →